MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414331422 · doi:10.1097/dss.0000000000004872

Laser Therapy for Lichen Planus Pigmentosus and Erythema Dyschromicum Perstans: A Systematic Review

2025· review· en· W4414331422 on OpenAlexaff
Nawar Tarafdar, Marissa Joseph, Chaocheng Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatologic Surgery · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral Health Pathology and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsErythemaLaser therapyHyperpigmentationLaserLow level laser therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDermatologic SurgerySame topicOral Health Pathology and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207