Abstract
Laser and intense pulsed light (IPL) therapies have shown promising effects on pathological scars, but the comparative effectiveness of laser and IPL therapies has not yet been studied. The aim of this study was to compare and rank the efficacy of laser and IPL therapies to determine the most effective treatment method for pathological scars. Relevant studies published up to February 2022 were identified by searching PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wanfang databases. We defined Vancouver Scar Scale score as the primary outcome. Both frequentist and Bayesian approaches were used to perform a network meta-analysis. We included 25 trials with a total of 1688 participants. The rankings based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve for the Vancouver Scar Scale score based on the Bayesian approach suggested IPL + CO2 (96.43%) > pulsed dye laser (PDL) + 1064-nm Nd:YAG (yttrium aluminum garnet) laser (86.21%) > PDL + CO2 (82.15%) > CO2 (58.97%) > 1064-nm Nd:YAG (57.03%) > PDL (52%) > 532-nm Nd:YAG (33.28%) > Er:YAG + IPL (28.38%) > Er:YAG (26.56%) > IPL (15.03%) > control (13.97%). The ranking results based on the frequentist approach were basically consistent with those based on the Bayesian approach. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that the combination of IPL and CO2 laser has the highest probability of being the most effective intervention. However, our conclusions must be interpreted with caution due to the relatively few evaluation indicators included in our study. Future well-designed randomized controlled trials with large sample sizes are required to confirm our conclusions.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
