Comparison of 1565-nm Nonablative Fractional Laser and 10600-nm Ablative Fractional Laser in the Treatment of Mild to Moderate Atrophic Acne Scars.

Abstract

BACKGROUND\nThe 10,600-nm ablative fractional laser (AFL) is widely used for treating facial atrophic acne scars but with evident side effects. By contrast, the common Er:Glass non-AFL (NAFL) is safer but lacks of comparable outcomes. A novel 1,565 nm Er:Glass NAFL improves thermal energy delivery and could yield better outcomes.\n\n\nOBJECTIVE\nWe aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety between the 1,565-nm NAFL and 10,600-nm AFL in treating mild-to-moderate facial atrophic acne scars.\n\n\nMETHODS\nNineteen patients with mild-to-moderate bilateral facial atrophic acne scars were enrolled in a randomized split-face trial, which involved 3-session procedures for each laser. The effectiveness and safety were evaluated by doctors and patients who were blinded to the treatment assignment.\n\n\nRESULTS\nBoth lasers improved the acne scar profiles comparably. A marked reduction in erythema, crusting durations, and degree of pain were noted on the sides treated with the 1,565-nm NAFL, relative to those treated with the 10,600-nm AFL.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nBoth 1,565 nm-NAFL and 10,600-nm AFL can improve mild-to-moderate acne scars. Patients should never expect complete resolution. The 1,565-nm NAFL has less side effects.