Evidence Hub

Clinical evaluation of a non-ablative 1940 nm fractional laser

Miller L, Mishra V, Alsaad S, Winstanley D, Blalock T, Tingey C, Qiu J, Romine S et al.

Journal of drugs in dermatology : JDD, 2014

7 citations

Abstract

Background and objectives: Non-ablative fractional lasers cause little down-time, however, some patients want more noticeable results with fewer treatments. The 1940 nm wavelength matches one of the water absorption peaks in the mid infrared band of electromagnetic energy. The skin absorption is much stronger than other non-ablative wavelengths (1410-1550 nm) and weaker than ablative wavelengths (Er:YAG or CO2). The objective of this study was to characterize clinical efficacy using this technology to treat photodamaged skin in human subjects.

Materials and methods: Under an IRB approved study, eleven subjects with facial photodamage (1 male and 10 female) were enrolled and completed the study. The fractional 1940 nm laser was comprised of a thulium rod pumped by a pulsed alexandrite laser. The fractional patterns were generated by four separate handpieces (two dot (0.48mm and 0.76mm dot-to-dot distance or pitch) and two grid geometries) whereby a larger beam was broken up into smaller microbeams by a microlens system or reflective square grids. The low -pitch circular dot array handpiece, which is used most frequently, has a macro-spot size of 12 mm and a total applied energy of approximately 2-5 J (~ 4-10 mJ per beamlet). Contact skin cooling (5-20degC) was provided via a sapphire window at the distal end of handpiece. Pulses from the dot handpieces were applied with 20% overlap. The microspot size for the dot handpieces was ~ 0.2-0.3 mm. The two grid pattern handpieces…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free