Abstract
Purpose
This split-face randomized study compared the efficacy and safety between 1064-nm picosecond laser with fractionated microlens array (MLA) and 1565-nm nonablative fractional laser to treat enlarged pores.
Methods
Participants with enlarged facial pores were enrolled and underwent three consecutive sessions at 2-week intervals with either a 1064-nm picosecond laser with MLA or a 1565-nm nonablative fractional laser. Images were captured at each visit. Objective (pore number) and subjective assessments, including patient self-evaluations and quartile improvement scales, were used to evaluate the treatment efficacy. The pain levels and adverse effects were recorded at each subsequent visit.
Results
The participants were 3 men and 22 women with enlarged facial pores. At the initial and 2-month checkups after the last treatment, the pore numbers were significantly decreased bilaterally for both lasers. The respective quartile improvement scale scores for the 1064-nm picosecond and 1565-nm fractional lasers were 2.22 ± 1.06 and 2.14 ± 1.11, while those for patient self-assessment were 3.72 ± 0.74 and 3.68 ± 0.75. The pore number, quartile improvement scale score, and patients’ self-assessments did not differ significantly between the two lasers. Treatment with the 1064-nm picosecond laser better reduced pain compared with the 1565-nm nonablative fractional laser (4.11 ± 1.33 vs. 4.83 ± 1.17). The occurrence of pigmentation did not differ significantly between the lasers.
Conclusion
Both the 1064-nm picosecond laser with MLA and the 1565-nm nonablative fractional laser are viable options for treating enlarged pores, and showed comparable respective efficacies; however, the former was less likely to cause hyperpigmentation and was better tolerated.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Uhoda E, Piérard-Franchimont C, Petit L, Piérard GE (2005) The conundrum of skin pores in dermocosmetology. Dermatology. ;210(1):3–7. https://doi.org/10.1159/000081474. PMID: 15604536
Hernandez-Perez E, Khawaja HA, Alvarez TY (2000) Oral isotretinoin as part of the treatment of cutaneous aging. Dermatol Surg. ;26(7):649 – 52. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1524-4725.2000.99210.x. PMID: 10886272
Phillips TJ, Gottlieb AB, Leyden JJ, Lowe NJ, Lew-Kaya DA, Sefton J, Walker PS, Gibson JR, Tazarotene Cream Photodamage Clinical Study Group (2002) ;. Efficacy of 0.1% tazarotene cream for the treatment of photodamage: a 12-month multicenter, randomized trial. Arch Dermatol. ;138(11):1486-93. https://doi.org/10.1001/archderm.138.11.1486. PMID: 12437455
Kakudo N, Kushida S, Tanaka N, Minakata T, Suzuki K, Kusumoto K (2011) A novel method to measure conspicuous facial pores using computer analysis of digital-camera-captured images: the effect of glycolic acid chemical peeling. Skin Res Technol 17(4):427–433. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0846.2011.00514.xEpub 2011 Feb 22. PMID: 21342294
Sayed KS, Hegazy R, Gawdat HI, Abdel Hay RM, Ahmed MM, Mohammed FN, Allam R, Fahim A (2021) The efficacy of intradermal injections of botulinum toxin in the management of enlarged facial pores and seborrhea: a split face-controlled study. J Dermatolog Treat. ;32(7):771–777. doi: 10.1080/09546634.2019.1708241. Epub 2020 Jan 3. PMID: 31865815
Marefat A, Dadkhahfar S, Tahvildari A, Robati RM (2022) The efficacy of polycaprolactone filler injection on enlarged facial pores. Dermatol Ther 35(8):e15600. https://doi.org/10.1111/dth.15600Epub 2022 Jun 8. PMID: 35622404
Lee SJ, Seok J, Jeong SY, Park KY, Li K, Seo SJ (2016) Facial Pores: Definition, Causes, and Treatment Options. Dermatol Surg. ;42(3):277 – 85. https://doi.org/10.1097/DSS.0000000000000657. PMID: 26918966
Manuskiatti W, Punyaratabandhu P, Tantrapornpong P, Yan C, Cembrano KAG (2021) Objective and long-term evaluation of the efficacy and safety of a 1064-nm Picosecond Laser with fractionated microlens array for the treatment of Atrophic Acne Scar in asians. Lasers Surg Med 53(7):899–905. https://doi.org/10.1002/lsm.23368Epub 2020 Dec 16. PMID: 33326626
Puaratanaarunkon T, Asawanonda P (2021) Efficacy of a one-session fractional picosecond 1064-nm laser for the treatment of atrophic acne scar and enlarged facial pores. J Cosmet Laser Ther 23(7–8):202–206 Epub 2022 Mar 23. PMID: 35318885
Palawisuth S, Manuskiatti W, Apinuntham C, Wanitphakdeedecha R, Cembrano KAG (2022) Quantitative assessment of the long-term efficacy and safety of a 1064-nm picosecond laser with fractionated microlens array in the treatment of enlarged pores in asians: a case-control study. Lasers Surg Med 54(3):348–354 Epub 2021 Jul 7. PMID: 34233039; PMCID: PMC9291000
Yim S, Lee YH, Choi YJ, Kim WS (2020) Split-face comparison of the picosecond 1064-nm nd:YAG laser using a microlens array and the quasi-long-pulsed 1064-nm nd:YAG laser for treatment of photoaging facial wrinkles and pores in asians. Lasers Med Sci 35(4):949–956. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-019-02906-1Epub 2019 Nov 16. PMID: 31734761
O Connor K, Cho SB, Chung HJ (2021) Wound Healing Profile after 1064- and 532-nm Picosecond Lasers with microlens array of in vivo human skin. Lasers Surg Med 53(8):1059–1064. https://doi.org/10.1002/lsm.23390Epub 2021 Feb 28. PMID: 33644902
Zhang M, Guan Y, Huang Y, Zhang E, Lin T, Wu Q (2021) Histological characteristics of skin treated with a fractionated 1064-nm nd: YAG Picosecond Laser with Holographic Optics. Lasers Surg Med 53(8):1073–1079. https://doi.org/10.1002/lsm.23389Epub 2021 Feb 10. PMID: 33565087
Chung HJ, Lee HC, Park J, Childs J, Hong J, Kim H, Cho SB (2019) Pattern analysis of 532- and 1064-nm microlens array-type, picosecond-domain laser-induced tissue reactions in ex vivo human skin. Lasers Med Sci 34(6):1207–1215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-018-02711-2Epub 2019 Jan 2. PMID: 30604347
Tanghetti Md E, Jennings J (2018) A comparative study with a 755 nm picosecond Alexandrite laser with a diffractive lens array and a 532 nm/1064 nm nd:YAG with a holographic optic. Lasers Surg Med 50(1):37–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/lsm.22752Epub 2017 Nov 7. PMID: 29111604
Habbema L, Verhagen R, Van Hal R, Liu Y, Varghese B (2012) Minimally invasive non-thermal laser technology using laser-induced optical breakdown for skin rejuvenation. J Biophotonics 5(2):194–199. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbio.201100083Epub 2011 Nov 2. PMID: 22045580; PMCID: PMC3494308
Balu M, Lentsch G, Korta DZ, König K, Kelly KM, Tromberg BJ, Zachary CB (2017) In vivo multiphoton-microscopy of picosecond-laser-induced optical breakdown in human skin. Lasers Surg Med 49(6):555–562. https://doi.org/10.1002/lsm.22655Epub 2017 Mar 23. PMID: 28333369; PMCID: PMC5513776
Jung JY, Cho SB, Chung HJ, Shin JU, Lee KH, Chung KY (2011) Treatment of periorbital wrinkles with 1550- and 1565-nm Er:glass fractional photothermolysis lasers: a simultaneous split-face trial. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. ;25(7):811-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-3083.2010.03870.x. Epub 2010 Nov 4. PMID: 21054563
Munavalli GA, Split-Face (2016) Assessment of the synergistic potential of sequential Q-Switched nd:YAG Laser and 1565 nm fractional nonablative laser treatment for facial rejuvenation in Fitzpatrick skin type II-V patients. J Drugs Dermatol 15(11):1335–1342 PMID: 28095544
Dou W, Yang Q, Yin Y, Fan X, Yang Z, Jian Z, Zhu Y, Wei J, Jing H, Ma X (2021) Fractional microneedle radiofrequency device and fractional erbium-doped glass 1,565-nm device treatment of human facial photoaging: a prospective, split-face, random clinical trial. J Cosmet Laser Ther 23(5–6):142–148 Epub 2022 Jan 27. PMID: 35083965
Yu W, Zhu J, Ma G, Yang J, Qiu Y, Chen Y, Chen H, Jin Y, Yang X, Hu X, Wang T, Chang L, Lin X (2018) Randomized split-face, controlled comparison of treatment with 1565-nm nonablative fractional laser for enlarged facial pores. Br J Dermatol 178(4):e271–e272. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.16115Epub 2018 Feb 27. PMID: 29192959
Wang Y, Zheng Y, Cai S (2022) Efficacy and safety of 1565-nm non-ablative fractional laser versus long-pulsed 1064-nm nd:YAG laser in treating enlarged facial pores. Lasers Med Sci 37(8):3279–3284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-022-03622-zEpub 2022 Aug 15. PMID: 35971017; PMCID: PMC9525434
Kwon HH, Choi SC, Lee WY, Jung JY, Park GH (2018) Clinical and Histological Evaluations of Enlarged Facial Skin Pores After Low Energy Level Treatments With Fractional Carbon Dioxide Laser in Korean Patients. Dermatol Surg. ;44(3):405–412. https://doi.org/10.1097/DSS.0000000000001313. PMID: 28902036
Magnani LR, Schweiger ES (2014) Fractional CO2 lasers for the treatment of atrophic acne scars: a review of the literature. J Cosmet Laser Ther 16(2):48–56 Epub 2013 Dec 5. PMID: 24131097
Marwan Al-Raeei (2021) Applying fractional quantum mechanics to systems with electrical screening effects. Chaos Solitons Fractals 150:111209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2021.111209
Cerantola V, Rosa AD, Konôpková Z, Torchio R, Brambrink E, Rack A, Zastrau U, Pascarelli S (2021) New frontiers in extreme conditions science at synchrotrons and free electron lasers. J Phys Condens Matter. ;33(27). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-648X/abfd50. PMID: 33930892
Yuan J, Lu Y, Wu Y, Gao XH, Chen HD (2022) Investigation of optimal energy or density of a fractional CO2 laser system in the treatment of stable non-segmental vitiligo. Complement Ther Clin Pract 49:101684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctcp.2022.101684Epub 2022 Nov 2. PMID: 36343424
Funding
This study was funded by the Clinical Medical Research Center for Dermatology and Venereal Diseases Construction Project (2019060001), Jiangsu Provincial “Double Innovation Doctors” Program (JSSCBS20211610) and the CAMS Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (CIFMS-2021-I2M-1-001).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
X.L. and Y.L. performed data acquisition, data analysis and manuscript preparation. R.Z. contributed to research design, data analysis, drawing illustrations and manuscript review. M.Z., L.G., H.Z. and Y.G. contributed to literature search and clinical studies. Q.W. and T.L. performed manuscript review. All authors read and approved the manuscript.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Ethics statement
This study was approved by the Peking Union Medical College, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, and Institute of Dermatology institutional review boards (2020-KY-012). Informed consent was obtained from all patients. All procedures were performed in compliance with ethical standards and in accordance with the principles of the World Medical Association Helsinki Declaration.
Conflicts of interest disclosure
All authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest and none were reported.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Liu, X., Zeng, R., Liu, Y. et al. Comparison of the 1064-nm picosecond laser with fractionated microlens array and 1565-nm non-ablative fractional laser for the treatment of enlarged pores: a randomized, split-face, controlled trial. Lasers Med Sci 39, 80 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-024-04028-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-024-04028-9