Department of Dermatology and Cutaneous Surgery, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, 1475 NW 12 Ave., Miami, FL 33136, USA.
Lasers Med Sci. 2010 Nov;25(6):901-6. doi: 10.1007/s10103-009-0729-5. Epub 2010 Jun 26.
The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of the 532 nm long-pulsed laser (10 ms) with that of the 532 nm short-pulsed laser (10 ns) for freckle removal. Currently, the gold standard for treatment is the short-pulsed laser. Recently, several long-pulsed lasers have been introduced for both hair removal and the treatment of freckles. To our investigative team's knowledge, no controlled experiments have been performed to compare the safety and efficacy of long-pulsed versus short-pulsed lasers for the treatment of freckles. This was a 4-week trial, and all patients had three freckles that were randomly allocated to be treated with short-pulse laser, long-pulse laser, or to receive no treatment (control). All patients had three freckles that were randomly selected to be treated with short-pulse 532 nm Medlite IV laser (10 n, 1 J/cm(2)), or long-pulse 532 nm Aura laser (10 ms, 1 J/cm(2)) or to remain as a control (no treatment). The laser treatment was only performed once, followed by a 1-day and a 1-month follow-up visit. Freckle size was determined by a novel surface area measurement technique that was created by our research staff. The study included 17 sets of freckles (three in each set). All of the lesions which received the short-pulsed laser treatment had immediate whitening of the lesions, which turned into dry scabs the next day. None of the freckles treated in the long-pulsed group or control group developed immediate whitening or scabs. No blisters or ulcers developed. The average pain score in the short-pulsed laser group was 2-3 out of 10, while it was 0 out of 10 in the long-pulsed laser group. All scabs that developed in the short-pulsed laser group fell off between days 6 and 12 (average 8 days). The outcome of this study verified the appropriate treatment of freckles. The study confirmed that when the same energy settings, short-pulsed laser is the more effective laser treatment regimen (when compared with the long-pulsed laser), with high tolerability and minimal side effects for patients with skin types I to IV.
本研究旨在比较 532nm 长脉冲激光（10ms）与 532nm 短脉冲激光（10ns）治疗雀斑的疗效和安全性。目前，治疗的金标准是短脉冲激光。最近，已经引入了几种长脉冲激光来脱毛和治疗雀斑。据我们研究小组所知，尚未进行对照实验来比较长脉冲与短脉冲激光治疗雀斑的安全性和疗效。这是一项为期 4 周的试验，所有患者均有 3 颗随机分配接受短脉冲激光、长脉冲激光或不治疗（对照）治疗的雀斑。所有患者均有 3 颗随机选择接受短脉冲 532nmMedliteIV 激光（10n，1J/cm²）或长脉冲 532nmAura 激光（10ms，1J/cm²）或不治疗（无治疗）的雀斑。激光治疗仅进行一次，随后进行 1 天和 1 个月的随访。通过我们研究人员创建的新型表面积测量技术来确定雀斑的大小。该研究包括 17 组雀斑（每组 3 个）。所有接受短脉冲激光治疗的病变均立即出现病变变白，第二天变成干燥的痂。长脉冲组或对照组的任何雀斑均未出现立即变白或结痂。没有出现水疱或溃疡。短脉冲激光组的平均疼痛评分为 10 分中的 2-3 分，而长脉冲激光组的疼痛评分为 0 分。短脉冲激光组中所有形成的痂均在第 6 天至第 12 天（平均 8 天）脱落。本研究的结果证实了适当的雀斑治疗方法。该研究证实，当使用相同的能量设置时，短脉冲激光是更有效的激光治疗方案（与长脉冲激光相比），对 I 型至 IV 型皮肤的患者具有较高的耐受性和最小的副作用。
