Comparative efficacy and safety of six photoelectric therapies for the atrophic acne scars: A network meta-analysis

Abstract

Objectives: This network meta-analysis assessed the relative efficacy and safety of six common photoelectric therapies including 1064-nm neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd: YAG), fractional carbon dioxide laser(FSCO2), fractional micro-plasma radiofrequency(Plasma), micro-needling fractional radiofrequency (MRF), 1550nm or 1540nm erbium-glass non-ablative fractional laser (NAFL) fractional erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Er: YAG). Methods: A comprehensive search to identify relevant studies was conducted using four electronic databases. Outcome measures were extracted based on subjective and objective indexes, including the dermatologists’ evaluation(DE), the patients’ overall satisfaction(PS), VAS score, and Postinflammatory hyperpigmentation (PIH). Results: Eleven published clinical research studies, involving 405 patients were included in this study. Ranking of DE from large to small is as follows: Nd: YAG, FSCO2, Er: YAG, Plasma, NAFL, MRF. In terms of PS, the rand from high to low can be described as follows: Er: YAG, Nd: YAG, FSCO2, Plasma, NAFL, MRF. In connection with the sequencing of adverse events, pain severity from slight to severe as follows: Er:YAG, Nd:YAG, FSCO2, NAFL, MRF, Plasma. The probability of having PIH are presented in order from lowest to highest as follows: MRF, Plasma, Nd: YAG, NAFL, Er: YAG, FSCO2. Conclusion: FSCO2 remains the mainstream of potentially curative treatment, then again Nd: YAG and Er: YAG require greater efforts to prove their superior effectiveness. NAFL might be appropriate for mild and moderate improvement with its strengths of good tolerance while Plasma fits into patients with higher pain thresholds but an expectation of higher results. MRF has not given expression on absolute predominance for the present.