MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3168284016 · doi:10.1007/s10103-021-03362-6

Periocular rejuvenation using a unique non-ablative long-pulse 2940 nm Er:YAG laser

2021· article· en· W3168284016 on OpenAlexaff
Ashraf Badawi, Tarek Sobeih, Vesel Jasmina

Bibliographic record

VenueLasers in Medical Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatologic Treatments and Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Association of Gastroenterology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRejuvenationAblative caseLaserEr:YAG laserMedicinePhotoagingWrinklePulse (music)Facial rejuvenationPatient satisfactionSurgeryMaterials scienceDermatologyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The periocular region is challenging for cosmetic laser surgeons. Surgery and laser resurfacing have traditionally been used to correct periorbital lines and wrinkles. Although effective, the associated downtime with these methods has made many people reluctant to decide for such treatments. More recently, the non-ablative long-pulse 2940 nm Er:YAG laser is being used to improve the structure and function and hence the appearance of skin in the periorbital region. The objective of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of long-pulse 2940 nm Er:YAG laser for non-ablative treatment of periorbital static wrinkles and skin laxity. This is a prospective analysis of 30 patients treated for periorbital rejuvenation using three sessions of non-ablative long-pulse Er:YAG laser over a 3-month period. All patients were assessed according to Fitzpatrick’s classification of periorbital wrinkles to class I, II, or III and were treated with 2940 nm Er:YAG laser using a fluence of 3.75 J/cm 2 , a repetition rate of 1.7–2 Hz, and with the SMOOTH™ pulse mode (250 ms). The treatment sessions were performed on each patient, 4 weeks apart. Patient improvement was assessed before each laser session as well as at 12 months after the final treatment. Blind photographic evaluations were performed by three independent physicians using unlabeled before and after photos arranged in non-chronological order. Reviewers were asked to determine the before and after photos. Patients were asked to answer a questionnaire measuring satisfaction 4 weeks after each session, and to report any adverse reactions. There was statistically and clinically significant improvement in the Fitzpatrick classification of the periorbital wrinkles. Blinded evaluators correctly identified the before and after photos in all cases. All patients reported mild edema and erythema, which persisted for 1 to 2 days, and superficial peeling of the skin for 4 to 6 days after each laser treatment. No long-term adverse effects were reported. The non-ablative long-pulse 2940 nm Er:YAG laser seems to be a safe and effective treatment for periocular rejuvenation with minimal and tolerable adverse reaction. The improvement attained from the laser sessions was persisting after 1 year denoting the long-term efficacy of the procedure.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.353 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLasers in Medical ScienceSame topicDermatologic Treatments and ResearchFrench-language works237,207