Comparison of ErbiumYAG and Carbon Dioxide Lasers

Authors: Khalil A Khatri Victor Ross Joop M Grevelink Cynthia M Magro R Rox Anderson

Publish Date: 1999/04/01

Volume: 135, Issue: 4, Pages: 391-397

PDF Link

Abstract

Percentage of subjects with erythema immediately after resurfacing and 1 2 and 8 weeks after resurfacing Left Treatment with fewer than 5 passes of erbiumYAG laser and 3 passes of carbon dioxide laser n=12 Right Treatment with 5 or more passes of erbiumYAG laser and 3 passes of carbon dioxide laser n=9Subject with swelling 1 day after resurfacing Subjects right side was treated with the carbon dioxide laser fluence 5 and 35 J/cm2 3 passes and the left side was treated with erbiumYAG laser fluence 76 J/cm2 5 passes Subject was unable to open her right eye for 1 dayPhotomicrographs of a biopsy specimen immediately after resurfacing showing residual thermal damage RTD Left ErbiumYAG laser–treated side fluence 5 J/cm2 6 passes Zone of RTD is about 30 µm hematoxylineosin ×20 Right Carbon dioxide laser–treated side fluence 63 and 5 J/cm2 2 passes Zone of RTD is about 60 µm hematoxylineosin ×20Photomicrographs of a biopsy specimen 6 months after resurfacing showing fibroplasia Left ErbiumYAG laser–treated side fluence 76 J/cm2 8 passes Zone of fibroplasia is about 475 µm hematoxylineosin ×20 Right Carbon dioxide laser–treated side fluence 63 and 5 J/cm2 3 passes Zone of fibroplasia is about 75 µm hematoxylineosin ×20Wrinkle improvement as graded by a blinded panel with fewer than 5 passes and 5 or more passes of erbiumYAG laser and 3 passes of carbon dioxide laser Modal scores were graded as follows 1 poor 2 fair 3 good 4 excellent and 5 complete clearanceWrinkle improvement Left Subject before resurfacing Right Subject 6 months after resurfacing Subjects right side was treated with the carbon dioxide laser fluence 63 and 5 J/cm2 3 passes and the left side was treated with the erbiumYAG laser fluence 76 J/cm2 8 passes Note the difference in pigmentation between treated and untreated skin The blinded panel gave an improvement score of 4 excellent to both sidesWrinkle improvement Left Subject before resurfacing Right Subject 6 months after resurfacing Subjects right side was treated with the carbon dioxide laser fluence 5 and 35 J/cm2 2 passes and the left side was treated with the erbiumYAG laser fluence 5 J/cm2 2 passes Note better improvement on the carbon dioxide laser–treated side The blinded panel gave an improvement score of 3 good to both sides

Keywords: