David J Leffell1. 1. Department of Dermatology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06520-8059, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the scientific evidence for the efficacy of devices for nonablative photorejuvenation of the skin. DATA SOURCES: All studies published between January 1996 and June 2002 in the dermatology literature listed in the MEDLINE database. Search terms included nonablative and photoaging or skin aging. STUDY SELECTION: All studies that presented data on human clinical trials that were designed to test the efficacy of nonablative light sources in reducing fine lines and wrinkles due to photodamage. DATA EXTRACTION: Data presented in the studies were reviewed and evaluated from the perspective of study design and validity of conclusions. DATA SYNTHESIS: Eleven studies were reviewed. Five different light sources were used, each with varying parameters. Ten different clinical end point scales and methodologies were used. No 2 studies used the same clinical end point standards. The majority of the studies provided no statistical analysis of data. CONCLUSIONS: The studies reviewed failed to present consistent data on the efficacy of nonablative photorejuvenation to improve or eliminate rhytids. The field is early in development, and continued improvement and standardization of study design are needed to determine the efficacy of these interventions.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the scientific evidence for the efficacy of devices for nonablative photorejuvenation of the skin. DATA SOURCES: All studies published between January 1996 and June 2002 in the dermatology literature listed in the MEDLINE database. Search terms included nonablative and photoaging or skin aging. STUDY SELECTION: All studies that presented data on human clinical trials that were designed to test the efficacy of nonablative light sources in reducing fine lines and wrinkles due to photodamage. DATA EXTRACTION: Data presented in the studies were reviewed and evaluated from the perspective of study design and validity of conclusions. DATA SYNTHESIS: Eleven studies were reviewed. Five different light sources were used, each with varying parameters. Ten different clinical end point scales and methodologies were used. No 2 studies used the same clinical end point standards. The majority of the studies provided no statistical analysis of data. CONCLUSIONS: The studies reviewed failed to present consistent data on the efficacy of nonablative photorejuvenation to improve or eliminate rhytids. The field is early in development, and continued improvement and standardization of study design are needed to determine the efficacy of these interventions.