title: Dye laser treatment of port-wine stains: comparison of the continuous-wave dye laser with a robotized scanning device and the pulsed dye laser.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Despite good results in the treatment of most port-wine stains (PWS) with continuous-wave visible-light lasers, light PWS and those in certain locations respond less favorably and have a higher risk of scarring. Robotized scanning devices such as the Hexascan device have been developed for continuous-wave laser sources to produce greater target specificity, to increase reproducibility of results, and to decrease the incidence of adverse effects.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of the same wavelength of light (585 nm) on test sites within PWS with the flashlamp-pumped pulsed dye laser and a continuous-wave tunable dye laser scanned through a Hexascan robotized scanning device.
  
  
  METHODS
  Two adjacent, noncontiguous sites within PWS were treated in 29 patients, one site with the flashlamp-pumped pulsed dye laser and the other with an argon-pumped continuous-wave tunable dye laser affixed to a Hexascan device.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Twenty-eight patients completed the study. The pulsed dye laser was found to be superior to the continuous-wave dye laser with the Hexascan device in 45% of patients, whereas the continuous-wave tunable dye laser with the Hexascan device was considered superior in 15%. There was no difference in the remaining 40%. Undesirable side effects were infrequent with both treatments. There was no significant difference in hypopigmentation or atrophic and hypertrophic scarring, but hyperpigmentation was more frequent with the continuous-wave dye laser with the Hexascan device.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Both the pulsed dye laser and continuous tunable-wave dye laser with the Hexascan device produce slight lightening after one treatment. The pulsed dye laser produces slightly greater lightening than the continuous-wave tunable dye laser with the Hexascan device 6 weeks after treatment of test areas within PWS in 40% of those treated. It also produced slightly less hypopigmentation and hyperpigmentation.
authors: Division of Dermatology, New England Deaconess Hospital, Boston, MA.
authors: J S
authors: JS
authors: Dover
authors: R
authors: R
authors: Geronemus
authors: R S
authors: RS
authors: Stern
authors: D
authors: D
authors: O'Hare
authors: K A
authors: KA
authors: Arndt
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001128:Argon; D002648:Child; D002921:Cicatrix / Q000517:prevention & control; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006222:Hamartoma / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*; D006801:Humans; D017075:Laser Coagulation / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010859:Pigmentation Disorders / Q000209:etiology; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012371:Robotics / Q000295:instrumentation; D012867:Skin / Q000473:pathology; D012871:Skin Diseases / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*; D012880:Skin Pigmentation; D016896:Treatment Outcome
chemical_list: D001128:Argon