A side-by-side comparison of carbon dioxide resurfacing lasers for the treatment of rhytides.
BACKGROUND
The use of cutaneous resurfacing lasers to treat rhytides is widely accepted. Several carbon dioxide lasers, many using fundamentally different technologies, are available.


OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to compare the results obtained and side effects after treating rhytides with 3 different carbon dioxide resurfacing lasers.


METHODS
We performed a randomized, blinded, prospective study wherein 16 subjects had either periorbital or perioral rhytides resurfaced with 1 of 3 carbon dioxide lasers on either side of the face.


RESULTS
We were unable to demonstrate any significant differences in improvement in rhytides, patient satisfaction, posttreatment erythema, or other side effects.


CONCLUSIONS
Our results suggest that operator technique and patient selection are more important factors than laser type with respect to outcome.
Department of Surgery, Boston University School of Medicine, Massachusetts, USA.
E A
EA
Gross
G S
GS
Rogers
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D002245:Carbon Dioxide; D004890:Erythema / Q000209:etiology; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D053685:Laser Therapy / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000295:instrumentation*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D010859:Pigmentation Disorders / Q000209:etiology; D011446:Prospective Studies; D015361:Rhytidoplasty / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000295:instrumentation*; D016037:Single-Blind Method; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome
D002245:Carbon Dioxide