TY - JOUR
T1 - Treatment effect of ultra-pulse dynamic CO2 laser and comedone extractor in dense comedones
T2 - a prospective, randomized, split-face, evaluator-blind, controlled clinical trial
AU - Yang, Meng Yao
AU - Qiao, Si Meng
AU - Ning, Di Chao
AU - Ding, Yi Hao
AU - Zeng, Wei Hui
AU - Wang, Zhao
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2024.
PY - 2024/12
Y1 - 2024/12
N2 - Clearance of comedone is challenging in the treatment of acne, as it is very likely to develop into inflammatory lesions. However, there is lack of effective treatments for dense comedones. Comedone extractor has been widely employed by dermatologists, but the effect is temporary and may cause irritation. CO2 laser is a potential method for dense comedones, but the efficacy and safety need to be explored. In this single-center, randomized, single-blind, self-controlled study, the faces of patients with dense comedones were randomly assigned into two sides receiving either ultra-pulse dynamic CO2 laser or comedone extraction at an interval of 2 weeks for 4 sessions. After 4 treatments, the average comedone reduction rate of the CO2 laser was 64.49%, which was higher than that by the extractor (46.36%) (P <.001). 79.16% of the patients reached over 50% reduction by CO2 laser, while only 37.5% on extractor treated side reached 50% clearance. Texture index, porphyrin index, red zone, erythema index, and transepidermal water loss decreased after both treatments, and CO2 laser showed more improvement. There was no difference in hydration index and melanin index between the two treatments. No permanent or severe side effects were observed on both sides. The CO2 laser showed higher comedone clearance with lower pain scores than the comedone extractor.
AB - Clearance of comedone is challenging in the treatment of acne, as it is very likely to develop into inflammatory lesions. However, there is lack of effective treatments for dense comedones. Comedone extractor has been widely employed by dermatologists, but the effect is temporary and may cause irritation. CO2 laser is a potential method for dense comedones, but the efficacy and safety need to be explored. In this single-center, randomized, single-blind, self-controlled study, the faces of patients with dense comedones were randomly assigned into two sides receiving either ultra-pulse dynamic CO2 laser or comedone extraction at an interval of 2 weeks for 4 sessions. After 4 treatments, the average comedone reduction rate of the CO2 laser was 64.49%, which was higher than that by the extractor (46.36%) (P <.001). 79.16% of the patients reached over 50% reduction by CO2 laser, while only 37.5% on extractor treated side reached 50% clearance. Texture index, porphyrin index, red zone, erythema index, and transepidermal water loss decreased after both treatments, and CO2 laser showed more improvement. There was no difference in hydration index and melanin index between the two treatments. No permanent or severe side effects were observed on both sides. The CO2 laser showed higher comedone clearance with lower pain scores than the comedone extractor.
KW - acne vulgaris
KW - carbon dioxide laser (CO laser)
KW - clinical research
KW - comedone extractor
KW - dense comedones
KW - treatment
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85203278513
U2 - 10.1007/s10103-024-04104-0
DO - 10.1007/s10103-024-04104-0
M3 - 文章
C2 - 39235691
AN - SCOPUS:85203278513
SN - 0268-8921
VL - 39
JO - Lasers in Medical Science
JF - Lasers in Medical Science
IS - 1
M1 - 233
ER -