Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 23, 2025
Author Spotlight: Advancing Facial Rejuvenation Therapy with Post-Laser Salicylic Acid Application
Published on: September 27, 2024
Prospective, Split-Face Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Non-ablative Fractional Laser for Periorbital Photoaging
Ximeng Jia1, Heng Zheng1, Lvping Huang1
1Laser Aesthetic Center, Plastic Surgery Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Thirty-three Badachu Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, 100144, People's Republic of China.
Background:
The 1550 nm and 1565 nm non-ablative fractional lasers (NAFL) have recently been introduced as treatments for periorbital photoaging. This prospective, randomized split-face trial aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of these NAFL treatments in addressing periorbital photoaging in Asian patients across various age groups.
Methods:
Eighteen patients completed the study, with nine under 45 (Group A) and nine aged 45 or older (Group B). Each received three 1550 nm and 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser treatments at 6-week intervals on the bilateral periorbital area. Comparative photographs were taken, and wrinkle depression scores and volumes were quantified. Patient satisfaction, adverse reactions, and pain scores were also recorded.
Results:
Significant improvement in bilateral periorbital photodamage was observed in patients Group B compared to baseline, while no significant improvement was noted in Group A. Throughout the study, Group B showed a trend of better outcomes in periorbital measurements compared to Group A, with a significant difference in treatment improvement between the two groups. No significant differences were observed between the two laser treatments. Both laser treatments were well tolerated, with limited and transient complications and no long-term adverse effects.
Conclusion:
The 1550 nm and 1565 nm NAFL treatments are advanced, effective, and safe methods for improving periorbital photoaging, showing superior and more consistent results in middle-aged and elderly patients. There were no significant differences between the two lasers. Patient age is a crucial factor influencing the effectiveness of these treatments, with middle-aged and elderly patients being the optimal candidates.
Level Of Evidence I:
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 .
