Laser Therapy for Lichen Planus Pigmentosus and Erythema Dyschromicum Perstans: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lichen planus pigmentosus (LPP) and erythema dyschromicum perstans (EDP) are dermal hyperpigmentation disorders that disproportionately affect individuals with darker skin and are often resistant to standard therapies. Laser treatment is emerging as a therapeutic option, although optimal parameters and safety remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy, laser parameters, and safety of laser therapy for LPP and EDP. METHODS: A systematic review of Medline, Embase, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (until December 10, 2024) was conducted. Studies reporting laser treatment outcomes for LPP or EDP were included. Two reviewers independently screened, extracted data, and assessed quality. RESULTS: Fifteen studies (56 patients; mean age 41.5 years; 82.1% female) were included. Lichen planus pigmentosus was more common ( n = 46). Q-switched (QS) Nd:YAG 1064 nm was the most frequently used laser (mean fluence 3.1 J/cm 2 , 6 sessions), with 75% achieving moderate to complete clearance. Picosecond and fractional lasers were also used, often with topical agents. Adverse events were mild; 1 case of koebnerized vitiligo occurred. CONCLUSION: Q-switched and picosecond Nd:YAG seem effective for LPP and EDP in patients with pigmented skin. Fractional lasers were also reported with varying results. Conservative parameters and combination regimens may optimize outcomes. Further controlled studies are warranted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".