Hybrid fractional laser treatment for photodamaged facial skin rejuvenation 6 years following fractional CO2 : Comparison of clinical outcome and patients' satisfaction

Anti-aging trends in Australia

Anti-aging trends in Australia have changed considerably since the country emerged from the lockdowns associated with the SARS-Cov2 pandemic. People now rely on social media influencers for skin care advice and skin care products, including professional skin care treatments that can be purchased on Internet platforms. The quest for the perfect 'zoom face' led to a 300% rise in cosmetic procedures across Australia in the year to April 2021. People now want to use less products on their skin, while looking healthy and natural (termed 'skin minimalism'). The popularity of retinoid derivatives for preventing wrinkles has been superseded by non-irritating actives like hyaluronic acid (HA) and niacinamide that provide skin barrier protection, skin hydration, plumping and anti-inflammatory effects. Botulinum toxin injections remain the most popular non-surgical cosmetic procedure, followed by HA fillers, and biostimulators that promote the synthesis of collagen and give longer lasting but more gradual results than HA fillers. Laser resurfacing is widely used for epidermal resurfacing and skin tightening, as well as non-ablative lasers, intense pulsed light and radiofrequency or ultrasound skin tightening devices. Superficial chemical peels are still popular because they are relatively gentle, inexpensive, and require no downtime, whereas medium-to-deep chemical peels have largely been superseded by laser technology. However, the most efficient approach to prevent skin aging is adopting a healthy lifestyle and taking action against all factors of the skin aging exposome.

Filament coating system assists recovery of ablative fCO2 laser treatment: A split-face clinical observation

BACKGROUND

The current nursing procedure after fractional carbon dioxide (fCO2) is complex and needs to be optimized. The present study was conducted to evaluate the assisting effect of filament coating system after fCO2 laser treatment.

METHODS

Chinese individuals aged from 18 to 65 years diagnosed as photoaging or atrophic acne scar were recruited and each participant was treated with one single pass of fCO2 laser. A split face was randomly assigned as treatment side or control side. For control side, conventional procedure was topically applied respectively, including desonide cream two times for 3 days, fusidic acid cream two times for 7 days, and recombinant human epidermal growth factor (RhEGF) gel four times for 7 days; for treating side, a filament coating system was applied immediately after one application of fusidic acid cream, desonide cream and RhEGF, and removed 3 h later, for 3 days. Erythema, edema, crust, and pain on both sides were scored from 0 to 10 before and 1, 2, 4, and 7 days after fCO2 laser treatment. Stratum corneum hydration (SCH) and sebum of forehead and cheek on both sides were also measured by using Corneometer-Sebumeter.

RESULTS

Twenty photoaging and 11 atrophic acne scar participants finished the observation. All of them complained of erythema, edema, crust, and pain after fCO2 laser treatment, and the scores decreased as time passed by. There were no statistical significances of erythema, edema, crust, pain, SCH, and sebum between treating side and control side at each observation time.

CONCLUSION

Filament coating system was effective, safe, convenient, and economic in assisting recovery of ablative fCO2 laser, which might be a new option for additional nursing procedure.

Hybrid fractional laser facial resurfacing: A comparison between a single treatment at high settings versus multiple treatments at low to moderate settings

OBJECTIVES

Fractional laser treatments for facial skin rejuvenation is an evolving field with the increase of innovative technologies. Typically, better results are achieved by using more aggressive approaches although this is accompanied by an increased risk. The demand for a modality that combines efficacy with minimal downtime and risk of adverse events led to the development of a hybrid laser, which delivers a fractional treatment of ablative CO2 and nonablative 1570 nm lasers, simultaneously. This study compares the clinical results, side effects, and downtime profile of the hybrid laser in multiple low-to-moderate-setting treatments versus a single high-setting treatment in the facial area.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective single-center study included 44 patients who underwent 1-3 treatments with the hybrid laser for facial rejuvenation between the years 2020-2022. The patients were divided into two groups based on the number of treatments they had received (Group A; single high-setting treatment, Group B; 2-3 low-to-moderate setting treatments). Three independent nontreating physicians evaluated the objective improvement by assessing the patients' standardized clinical photographs before and after the treatments, using three different scales. Treatment data, adverse events, and patients' satisfaction in each group were also reviewed.

RESULTS

A superiority to 2-3 low-to-moderate setting treatments (Group B) was found in most of the evaluated scales. Patients' satisfaction was significantly higher in Group B, and the average downtime was significantly lower: 4.3 ± 1.6 days versus 7.3 ± 2.3 days in Group A. The expected treatment effects were significantly milder in severity in Group B as graded by the patients, and no adverse events were reported in this group. An average overall improvement of 51%-75% according to Global Esthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) was found in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The new hybrid laser generates remarkable clinical outcomes in facial rejuvenation. Performing several treatments at mild to moderate settings can lead to a safer and more favorable procedure while maintaining high efficacy and achieving higher patients' satisfaction.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy, safety, and satisfaction rates of laser combination treatments vs laser monotherapy in skin rejuvenation resurfacing

Laser therapies have been well-established in ameliorating skin-aging consequences. This systematic review aims to determine the efficacy, safety profile, and satisfaction rates of laser combination therapies on skin rejuvenation resurfacing. A systematic search was performed in four major databases up to September 2022. Skin rejuvenation studies were eligible comprising at least one laser combination arm, inclusive of all laser types (ablative or non-ablatives), and one monotherapy arm selected from one of the combined modalities. Studies combining one laser modality with radiofrequency (RF) or intense pulse light (IPL) were also assessed. Trials that did not encompass a monotherapy control arm were evaluated independently as single-arm studies. Eighteen clinical trials recruiting 448 cases were included after screening. A total of 532 nm KTP + 1064 nm Nd:YAG and 2940 nm Er:YAG + Nd:YAG were the two most utilized laser combinations and exerted higher improvements and milder adverse events, compared to their monotherapy in most studies. Combining CO2 with rhodamine-IPL or gallium arsenide laser increased efficacy and satisfaction and brings about faster skin recovery time. Augmenting CO2 + RF did not increase improvement vs CO2 laser alone but prolonged skin erythema. Our meta-analysis revealed the pooled prevalence of quartile improvement rates as 0%, 28%, 40%, 27% in laser combination group, and 0%, 9%, 31%, 17% in laser monotherapy group, respectively. The satisfaction within each quartile category was 39%, 25%, 15%, 7% in laser combination and 20%, 25%, 16%, 17% in laser monotherapy, respectively, suggestive of the higher efficacy and satisfaction of laser combination group. The pain scores were lower in laser combination group than monotherapy (4.8 ± 1.18 vs 7.18 ± 0.7, converted on a scale of 0 to 10). Post-laser skin erythema lasted less longer in the combination group (12.8 vs 15.24 days). Laser combination therapies were discovered to be superior to their monotherapies in terms of clinical improvement rates, diminished adverse events such as pain and erythema and patients satisfaction rates. Due to paucity of high-quality reportings, additional trials are warranted to corroborate these results.

The Safety and Efficacy of a Dual CO 2 and 1570-nm Hybrid Laser for Periorbital Rejuvenation

BACKGROUND

Many modalities are used for periorbital rejuvenation, with a wide range of efficacy and safety. To achieve favorable outcomes with minimal downtime and adverse effects, professionals developed a hybrid laser, which allows simultaneous treatment with 2 wavelengths: fractional ablative and fractional nonablative lasers.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a new hybrid laser for periorbital rejuvenation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective single-center study includes 24 patients who underwent a single-pass treatment with a CO 2 and 1570-nm hybrid laser for periorbital rejuvenation between 2020 and 2022. Patients' standardized clinical photographs before and after the treatment were assessed by 4 independent physicians for objective improvement. Treatment data, safety, and patients' satisfaction were also reviewed.

RESULTS

Statistically significant objective improvements were found in all investigated scales with an improvement of 1 to 2 points on each scale. Patients' satisfaction was 3.1/4. Average downtime was 5.9 ± 1.7 days. Most adverse effects were mild to moderate in severity (89.7%), including erythema, crusting, pruritis, edema, and hyperpigmentation.

CONCLUSION

After a single-pass treatment, the laser generates 26% to 50% improvement in the periorbital area, with a strong safety profile and a relatively simple recovery. Further research is needed to validate the efficacy of this technology compared with more aggressive modalities.