[Scientometric analysis of evidence-based studies of physical methods of post-acne scar correction]

[High-intensity laser therapy in clinical medicine: scientometric analysis of evidence of effectiveness]

INTRODUCTION

High-intensity laser technologies are widely used in modern restorative medicine, and indications for their use are expanding annually. These technologies are effective, potentially safe methods of treating many diseases. with pronounced therapeutic effects.

PURPOSE OF RESEARCH

Analysis of scientific evidence of the effectiveness and safety of high-intensity laser therapy in patients with various diseases.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A comprehensive scientometric analysis of evidence-based studies of the effectiveness and safety of high-intensity laser therapy methods was carried out according to electronic databases (Google scholar, PEDro, PubMed, Cochrane DATABASE) for the period from 2006 to 2021.

RESULTS

High-intensity laser therapy has a wide range of significantly pronounced therapeutic effects. and it is an effective method of treating patients with various diseases. Various technologies and methods of its application are widely used in various fields of clinical medicine. Individually developed therapy protocols are needed, with optimal exposure parameters for each patient, intervals between procedures.

CONCLUSION

It is advisable to develop more reliable and standard evaluation criteria, regular generalization and analysis of existing evidence, careful planning and implementation of further large-scale randomized controlled trials to study the effects of high-intensity laser radiation both as a single effect and as part of combinations with other treatment methods. The effectiveness of combination therapy requires further analysis in the course of conducting new benign clinical trials.

Microneedling Monotherapy for Acne Scar: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

Acne scarring, formed by the deposition of collagen following inflammatory acne, not only represents a cosmetic problem but also poses a psychological health risk to patients. As microneedling has become a common treatment for acne scarring, an increasing number of studies have compared the efficacy and safety of microneedling. In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing microneedling with other treatments.

METHOD

Three databases, namely Embase, PubMED, and Cochrane library, were searched until June 20, 2021, for RCTs only. Studies using microneedling in both treatments were excluded.

RESULTS

Twelve studies, totaling 414 participants, were included in our meta-analysis. For objective scar improvement, the pooled estimate analysis of the first group, treated with microneedling without radiofrequency, yielded a mean difference of 0.42 (95% CI-0.12-0.73%) with a significant difference at the 5% significance level. The second group, treated with fractional radiofrequency microneedling, exhibited no significance at the 5% significance level. Regarding subjective satisfaction, most results exhibited no significant difference between microneedling and other treatments. Although no case of secondary scarring or infection was reported in our study, the pooled result of postinflammatory hyperpigmentation was significant at the 5% significance level and preferred microneedling treatment.

CONCLUSION

Microneedling without radiofrequency achieved superior results in terms of scar improvement. No form of microneedling caused postinflammatory hyperpigmentation-an advantage in acne scar treatment. Thus, microneedling is a favorable choice for the treatment of acne scarring.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .