Abobotulinum toxin A for periorbital facial rejuvenation: impact on ocular refractive parameters

Promotor methylation in ocular surface squamous neoplasia development: epigenetics implications in molecular diagnosis

INTRODUCTION

Cancer is heavily influenced by epigenetic mechanisms that include DNA methylation, histone modifications, and non-coding RNA. A considerable proportion of human malignancies are believed to be associated with global DNA hypomethylation, with localized hypermethylation at promoters of certain genes.

AREA COVERED

The present review aims to emphasize on recent investigations on the epigenetic landscape of ocular surface squamous neoplasia, that could be targeted/explored using novel approaches such as personalized medicine.

EXPERT OPINION

While the former is thought to contribute to genomic instability, promoter-specific hypermethylation might facilitate tumorigenesis by silencing tumor suppressor genes. Ocular surface squamous neoplasia, the most prevalent type of ocular surface malignancy, is suggested to be affected by epigenetic mechanisms, as well. Although the exact role of epigenetics in ocular surface squamous neoplasia has mostly been unexplored, recent findings have greatly contributed to our understanding regarding this pathology of the eye.

Treatment of periorbital wrinkles using thermo-mechanical fractional injury therapy versus fractional non-ablative 1565 nm laser: A comparative prospective, randomized, double-arm, controlled study

BACKGROUND

Non-ablative fractional laser is an effective modality for the treatment of periorbital wrinkling, one of the earliest signs of skin aging. Thermo-mechanical fractional injury (TMFI) therapy (Tixel®, Novoxel®, Israel) is an innovative technology that is now being used for facial skin rejuvenation. Our study compares the clinical results, side effects, and downtime profile between TMFI treatment and non-ablative fractional 1565 nm laser (ResurFX®, Luminis, Israel).

METHODS

This was a prospective study of 68 patients (64 women, 4 men) with skin types I-VI in two medical centers (34 from Israel, 34 from the USA) that were randomized to receive either TMFI or NAFL treatment for periorbital wrinkling. Patients received 3-5 treatments, 3-5 weeks apart. Six months after the last treatment, the change in Fitzpatrick Wrinkling Classification System (FWCS) was calculated by three non-involved physicians and compared to pretreatment results. Side effects and downtime profiles were assessed in each group (including VAS pain assessment, time required to refrain from work and social activity, and time required for the resolution of redness, edema, and crusts.) RESULTS: A moderate improvement in periorbital wrinkling was demonstrated in both groups, with an average improvement of 1.6 ± 0.6 in FWCS in the TMFI group and an average improvement of 1.7 ± 0.8 in the NAFL group (p < 0.001). Postprocedural VAS score was 5.86 ± 2.3 in the NAFL group and 4.01 ± 2.6 in the Tixel® group. Approximately 80% of subjects returned to both work and social activities two days postprocedure. Crusts were reported by 52% of patients in the TMFI group, compared to 16% of patients in the NAFL group more than 48 hours postprocedure (p < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the other parameters between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

TMFI is an effective and safe modality for the treatment of periorbital wrinkling, with comparable results to the 1565 nm NAFL.