Efficacy and safety of 1064‐nm Q‐switched Nd:YAG laser with low fluence for keloids and hypertrophic scars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several treatment modalities using laser devices have been used for the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars with various therapeutic outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe the efficacy and safety of 1064-nm Q-switched (QS) Nd:YAG laser with low fluence on keloids and hypertrophic scars. METHODS: Keloids and hypertrophic scars located at 21 anatomic sites in 12 Korean patients (10 men and 2 women; mean age 23.8 years, range 21-33) were treated using 1064-nm QS Nd:YAG laser with low fluence at 1-2 week intervals. Treatment settings were 1.8-2.2 J/cm(2), 7-mm spot size and 5-6 passes with appropriate overlapping. RESULTS: Follow-up data collected 3 months after the final treatment revealed decreases in the mean score for the following lesion characteristics: pigmentation from 1.8 to 1.2; vascularity from 1.4 to 1.0; pliability from 3.0 to 2.0 and height from 2.3 to 1.8. The modified Vancouver General Hospital Burn Scar Assessment score decreased from 8.6 to 5.9 (P < 0.0001). Observed side-effects were a mild prickling sensation during treatment, and mild post-treatment erythema, both of which resolved within few hours. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that QS Nd:YAG laser with low fluence may be used for the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".