Meta-analysis Of Non-ablative Fractional Laser Versus Ablative CO2 Fractional Laser For Acne Scars

Objective:Systematic evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of NFL(non-ablative fractional laser system)and AFL(ablative CO2 fractional laser system)in the treatment of acne scars.Methods:Computer search PubMed,Springer Link,Embase,China Journal Net Full-Text Database(China Knowledge Network),VIP Database,Wanfang Database,Time 2008.01-now Search All About NFL(non-ablative fractional laser system)and AFL(ablative CO2 fractional laser system)treatment of acne scars in randomized controlled trials and casecontrol studies,the experimental group is NFL,in order to prevent missed search,search for references included in the literature.The methodological quality assessment of the final included studies was performed,and Meta analysis was finally performed using RevMan 5.3software.Results:This meta-analysis included 5 studies,4 randomized controlled trials and 1 casecontrol study.In the experimental group,105 cases of acne scars were treated with NFL,and 97 cases of acne scars were treated with AFL in the control group.The results of metaanalysis showed that: 1.There was no significant difference in the rate of scar scoring between the two treatments(OR=0.93,95% CI(0.45,1.96),P=0.86);2.Duration of adverse reactions(Erythema)after treatment in both groups was statistically significant(SMD =-2.33,95% CI(-3.61,-1.05),P <0.05).The duration of adverse reactions in the NFL group was significantly shorter than that of the AFL group;3.There was a statistically significant difference in VAS(visual analogue scale)after treatment in the group [SMD =-2.02,95% CI(-3.8,-0.25),P<0.05].The VAS score in the NFL group was lower than that in the AFL group.Conclusion:The results of this meta-analysis showed no difference in the effectiveness of NFL(non-ablative fractional laser system)and AFL(ablative CO2 fractional laser system)in the treatment of acne scars,but the safety of the former was higher than that of the latter.