Objective: To compare the efficacy and adverse events of pulsed dye laser( 595nm ) and intense pulsed light in treatment of facial telangiectasia. Methods : By the visiting time, 95 patients with facial tel-angiectasia were randomly allocated to two groups in terms of the random digital tables. Group A( n -47 ) were treated with 595nm pulsed dye laser and group B( n - 48 )intense pulsed light for one to three times. By intervals of 4 weeks after treatment, the two groups were observed for therapeutic effects by comparing the subsided telangiectasia. Results: 18.1% of the patients in group A were cured and 47. 9% in group B. The two groups were statistically different, and yet had no occurrence of serious side effects. Conclusion-. Although both 595nm pulsed dye laser and intense pulsed light may lead to minor adverse events, the former appears superior to the latter in treatment of telangiectasia.%目的:对比研究595nm脉冲染料激光和强脉冲光治疗面部毛细血管扩张的疗效及不良反应.方法:95例患者按就诊时间,通过随机数字表分为2组,A组47例采用595nm脉冲染料激光治疗,B组48例采用强脉冲光治疗.治疗1～3次,间隔4周,观察扩张血管消退比例以评价疗效.结果:A组痊愈率78.7%,B组痊愈率47.9%,两组相比差异有统计学意义.两组均未发现严重不良反应.结论:595nm脉冲染料激光治疗面部毛细血管扩张疗效优于强脉冲光,两者不良反应轻微.
展开▼
