ArticleGalen medical journal2026
Safety and Efficacy of Laser Versus Cryotherapy in the Treatment of Lentigines: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials : Short title: Safety and Efficacy of Laser Versus Cryotherapy in the Treatment of Lentigines.
Article in Galen medical journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lentignies is one of the pigmentary skin lesions causing abnormal skin color in sun-exposed areas in particular the hands and the face. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to study the safety and efficacy of cryotherapy versus laser in lentigines treatment. Materials and Methods: Beginning from inception and up to 19th May 2023, we did a comprehensive search strategy including five databases (Web of Science=33, Scopus=79, PubMed=28, Virtual Health Library=30 and Scholar=622). The search strategy was performed according to the search term "("solar lentigines" OR "solar lentigo" OR "lentigines" OR "lentigo") AND ("laser") AND ("cryotherapy")". Results: total of 5 studies (n=13-120, mean age 39-60) comparing lasers (Q-switched Nd:YAG, PDL, argon, CO2, etc.) vs cryotherapy for solar lentigines, mostly using intrapatient randomization, were included. Meta-analysis revealed no significant difference in marked (OR=1.15, 95% CI [-0.42, 2.73], P=0.151, I²=0.6%) or moderate improvement (OR=0.63, 95% CI [-0.01, 1.26], P=0.055, I²=0%), but lasers yielded significantly higher ≥50% improvement in patients (OR=1.36, 95% CI [0.5, 2.21], P=0.002, I²=0.3%), lower mild (OR=-0.96, 95% CI [-1.65, -0.26], P=0.007, I²=0%) and poor response in lesions (OR=-1.72, 95% CI [-3.2, -0.24], P=0.023, I²=0%). Side effects were comparable; heterogeneity remained very low (I²≤0.9%). Four studies showed high risk of bias. One trial demonstrated fractional CO2 or cryotherapy plus 4% pidobenzone significantly outperformed monotherapy. Conclusion: Laser may be superior to cryotherapy in the treatment of lentigines with comparable side effects among the two groups. However, we recommend further RCTs comparing the two modalities to confirm our findings which had many limitations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.