MedWire News: Pulsed dye laser (PDL) and 1064-nm long-pulsed neodymium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Nd:YAG) laser treatments are similarly effective for treating facial acne scars, a randomized, split-face study suggests.
Nonablative remodeling lasers such as the 585-nm PDL or 1064-nm Nd:YAG can reduce acne scarring with minimal downtime and a low risk for adverse events, say Dae Hun Suh (Seoul National University College of Medicine, Korea) and co-workers.
Noting that studies have not compared a 585-nm PDL and a 1064-nm Nd:YAG laser in the same patient, they used both lasers on 18 individuals affected by acne scars.
Patients received four sessions of PDL or Nd:YAG laser treatment at 2-week intervals in a randomized split-face manner, and were followed up at 4-week intervals for 8 weeks after the final session.
The treatments resulted in similar, mild, atrophic acne scar improvements at 8 weeks after treatment that were statistically significant.
Clinical scores for acne scarring using the Echelle d’évaluation Clinique des Cicatrices d’Acne (ECCA) improved by a mean of 18.3% with PDL and 18.7% with Nd:YAG, a nonsignificant difference. Histologic improvements concurred with clinical efficacy.
Both modalities were particularly effective at treating superficial rolling and boxcar scars, with more than 25% improvements at 8 weeks after treatment.
Ice-pick scars tended to respond better to PDL, while deep boxcar scars tended to benefit more with the Nd:YAG lasers, although these differences were not significant.
Nonetheless, the researchers say: “This observation, which has not been previously mentioned in the literature, might be valuable for choosing the type of laser better suited for the treatment of certain scar types.”
Reporting in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, they further note that “greater improvement by test shots with Nd:YAG laser than by those with PDL strongly favors the use of Nd:YAG laser in the subsequent sessions.”
MedWire (www.medwire-news.md) is an independent clinical news service provided by Current Medicine Group, a part of Springer Science+Business Media. © Current Medicine Group Ltd; 2009
Free abstract
