Optimizing wound healing in the face after laser abrasion

Goldman, Mitchel P.; Roberts, Thomas L.; Skover, Greg R.; Lettieri, John; Fitzpatrick, Richard

doi:10.1067/mjd.2002.118358

Cited by 33 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Subsequent loss of barrier function results in discomfort and desiccation-induced extension of the original wound depth [1]. Transudation, focal crusting, and edema are generally observed during the period of dermal exposure [2][3][4]. Epidermal loss also increases the risk of infection, scarring, and pigmentary changes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intradermally focused infrared laser pulses: Thermal effects at defined tissue depths

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intradermally focused infrared laser pulses: Thermal effects at defined tissue depths

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several randomized controlled trials have documented a significant reduction of facial rhytides after CO 2 laser resurfacing [6][7][8]. Moreover, from randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials it seems that non-ablative lasers and IPL systems induce a minor to moderate shortterm improvement of facial lines and rhytides [4,9,10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ablative versus non‐ablative treatment of perioral rhytides. A randomized controlled trial with long‐term blinded clinical evaluations and non‐invasive measurements

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objective: To compare efficacy and side effects of CO 2 laser resurfacing and intense pulsed light (IPL) rejuvenation for treatment of perioral rhytides. Methods: Twenty-seven female subjects with perioral rhytides (class I-III) were randomly treated with either CO 2 laser or IPL (three monthly treatments). Efficacy was evaluated by patient self-assessments and blinded photographs up to 12 months postoperatively. Side effects were assessed clinically. Non-invasive measurements included: trans epidermal water loss (TEWL), skin reflectance, skin elasticity, and ultrasound. Results: CO 2 laser resurfacing resulted in higher degrees of patient satisfaction and clinical rhytide reduction compared to IPL rejuvenation up to 12 months postoperatively (patient evaluations, P < 0.05) (observer evaluations, P < 0.008). Laser-induced side effects included erythema, dyspigmentation, and milia whereas no side effects were observed after IPL rejuvenation. Non-invasive measurements showed a significant higher reduction of the subepidermal low-echogenic band in CO 2 laser treated areas versus IPL treated areas (12 months postoperatively, P < 0.001). Skin elasticity (expressed as Young's modulus) increased in both groups (P ¼ ns). One month postoperatively a significant increase in TEWL values (P < 0.009) and skin redness% (P < 0.02) was found in CO 2 laser treated patients versus IPL treated patients. No significant differences were seen in skin pigmentation% during the observation period. Conclusion: CO 2 laser resurfacing induces a significantly higher degree of clinical rhytide reduction followed by considerably more side effects compared to IPL rejuvenation in a homogeneous group of patients.

show abstract

“…Both open and closed wound care methods are used to expedite postoperative wound healing. Data from several studies show that closed wound care using occlusive dressings after LSR may hasten re-epithelialization and reduce patient discomfort, crusting, duration and intensity of erythema, and swelling (2)(3)(4).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both open and closed wound care methods can be used to minimize morbidity and expedite postoperative wound healing. Numerous studies indicate that closed wound care regimens utilizing occlusive dressings for 48-72 hours postoperatively may hasten re-epithelialization and reduce crusting, discomfort, erythema, and swelling (2)(3)(4). Appropriate medications and management techniques can also minimize the predictable, undesirable effects of LSR.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%