Dermatological Surgery and Lasers

Prospective comparison treatment of 595-nm pulsed-dye lasers for virgin port-wine stain

W. Yu

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

G. Ma,

G. Ma

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

Y. Qiu,

Y. Qiu

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

H. Chen,

H. Chen

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

Y. Jin,

Y. Jin

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

X. Yang,

X. Yang

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

L. Chang,

L. Chang

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

T. Wang,

T. Wang

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

X. Hu,

X. Hu

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

W. Li,

W. Li

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

X. Lin,

Corresponding Author

X. Lin

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Correspondence

X. Lin.

E-mail: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author

W. Yu,

W. Yu

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

G. Ma,

G. Ma

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

Y. Qiu,

Y. Qiu

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

H. Chen,

H. Chen

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

Y. Jin,

Y. Jin

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

X. Yang,

X. Yang

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

L. Chang,

L. Chang

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

T. Wang,

T. Wang

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

X. Hu,

X. Hu

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

W. Li,

W. Li

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Search for more papers by this author

X. Lin,

Corresponding Author

X. Lin

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Laser Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200011 China

Correspondence

X. Lin.

E-mail: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author

First published: 18 August 2014

https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.13356

Citations: 22

Funding sources This study was supported by a grant of the Shanghai Health System Important Disease Joint Research Project (2013ZYJB0014).

Conflicts of interest None declared.

Share a link

Email
Wechat
Bluesky

Summary

Background

Vbeam^® and Cynergy^® are 595-nm pulsed-dye laser (PDL) equipment options, both extensively used in the clinical treatment of port-wine stains (PWS). However, there has been no study conducted of the differences in PWS therapeutic outcomes across both devices.

Objectives

To compare the efficacy and safety of Vbeam and Cynergy equipment in the treatment of PWS.

Methods

Twenty-two patients with PWS were included in this study and were treated with both Vbeam and Cynergy. Patients underwent three treatment sessions. Treatment parameters used were as follows: (i) Cynergy^®, Cynosure Corp., 595-nm wavelength, radiant exposure of 11 J cm⁻², 2-ms pulse duration, 7-mm spot size, cold-air cooling system of level 3. (ii) Vbeam^®, Candela Corp., 595-nm wavelength, radiant exposure of 11 J cm⁻², 1·5-ms pulse duration, 7-mm spot size, cryogen spray cooling (30 ms of cooling with a 20-ms delay). Clinical efficacy outcomes were evaluated by chromameter and visual assessment 2 months post-treatment.

Results

All patients were treated by both Vbeam and Cynergy on adjacent sites. Chromameter evaluation showed that the average blanching rate was 21·24% for Cynergy sites and 36·42% for Vbeam sites. This difference was statistically significant (P = 0·05), which suggests that PWS respond better to Vbeam than to Cynergy at the settings used in this study. No patients developed scarring or permanent pigmentation change.

Conclusions

Compared with Cynergy, Vbeam may be more effective in the treatment of PWS. Despite using supposedly equivalent fluences in 595-nm PDLs, equivalent clinical results cannot be guaranteed.

References

1Jacobs AH, Walton RG. The incidence of birthmarks in the neonate. Pediatrics 1976; 58: 218–22.
10.1542/peds.58.2.218
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
2Van Drooge AM, Beek JF, van der Veen JP et al. Hypertrophy in port-wine stains: prevalence and patient characteristics in a large patient cohort. J Am Acad Dermatol 2012; 67: 1214–19.
10.1016/j.jaad.2012.05.027
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
3Lanigan SW, Cotterill JA. Psychological disabilities amongst patients with port wine stains. Br J Dermatol 1989; 121: 209–15.
10.1111/j.1365-2133.1989.tb01800.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
4Lanigan SW, Taibjee SM. Recent advances in laser treatment of port-wine stains. Br J Dermatol 2004; 151: 527–33.
10.1111/j.1365-2133.2004.06163.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
5Nelson JS, Milner TE, Anvari B et al. Dynamic epidermal cooling in conjunction with laser-induced photothermolysis of port wine stain blood vessels. Lasers Surg Med 1996; 19: 224–9.
10.1002/(SICI)1096-9101(1996)19:2<224::AID-LSM15>3.0.CO;2-6
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
6Huikeshoven M, Koster PH, de Borgie CA et al. Redarkening of port-wine stains 10 years after pulsed-dye-laser treatment. N Engl J Med 2007; 356: 1235–40.
10.1056/NEJMoa064329
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
7Chang CJ, Kelly KM, Van Gemert MJ, Nelson JS. Comparing the effectiveness of 585-nm vs. 595-nm wavelength pulsed dye laser treatment of port wine stains in conjunction with cryogen spray cooling. Lasers Surg Med 2002; 31: 352–8.
10.1002/lsm.10102
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
8Laube S, Taibjee ST, Lanigan SW. Treatment of resistant port wine stains with the V beam pulsed dye laser. Laser Surg Med 2003; 33: 282–7.
10.1002/lsm.10234
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
9Edstrom DW, Ros AM. The treatment of port-wine stains with the pulsed dye laser at 600 nm. Br J Dermatol 1997; 136: 360–3.
10.1046/j.1365-2133.1997.d01-1200.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
10Kelly KM, Nanda VS, Nelson JS. Treatment of port-wine stain birthmarks using the 1·5-msec pulsed dye laser at high fluences in conjunction with cryogen spray cooling. Dermatol Surg 2002; 28: 309–13.
10.1046/j.1524-4725.2002.02071.x-i1
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
11Watanabe S. Basics of laser application to dermatology. Arch Dermatol Res 2008; 300 (Suppl.): S21–30.
10.1007/s00403-007-0801-6
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
12Rah DK, Kim SC, Lee KH et al. Objective evaluation of treatment effects on port-wine stains using L*a*b* color coordinates. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001; 108: 842–7.
10.1097/00006534-200109150-00005
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
13Babilas P, Schreml S, Eames T et al. Split-face comparison of intense pulsed light with short- and long-pulsed dye lasers for the treatment of port-wine stains. Lasers Surg Med 2010; 42: 720–7.
10.1002/lsm.20964
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
14Lanigan SW. Port-wine stains unresponsive to pulsed dye laser: explanations and solutions. Br J Dermatol 1998; 139: 173–7.
10.1046/j.1365-2133.1998.02351.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
15Scherer K, Lorenz S, Wimmershoff M et al. Both the flashlamp-pumped dye laser and the long-pulsed tunable dye laser can improve results in port-wine stain therapy. Br J Dermatol 2001; 145: 79–84.
10.1046/j.1365-2133.2001.04285.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
16Fiskerstrand EJ, Svaasand LO, Kopstad G et al. Laser treatment of port wine stains: therapeutic outcome in relation to morphological parameters. Br J Dermatol 1996; 134: 1039–43.
10.1111/j.1365-2133.1996.tb07939.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
17Fiskerstrand EJ, Svaasand LO, Kopstad G et al. Photothermally induced vessel-wall necrosis after pulsed dye laser treatment: lack of response in port-wine stains with small sized or deeply located vessels. J Invest Dermatol 1996; 107: 671–5.
10.1111/1523-1747.ep12365566
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
18Gao K, Huang Z, Yuan KH et al. Side-by-side comparison of photodynamic therapy and pulsed-dye laser treatment of port-wine stain birthmarks. Br J Dermatol 2013; 168: 1040–6.
10.1111/bjd.12130
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
19Dover JS. New approaches to the laser treatment of vascular lesions. Australas J Dermatol 2000; 41: 14–18.
10.1046/j.1440-0960.2000.00382.x
CAS PubMed Google Scholar
20Anderson RR, Parrish JA. Microvasculature can be selectively damaged using dye lasers: a basic theory and experimental evidence in human skin. Lasers Surg Med 1981; 1: 263–76.
10.1002/lsm.1900010310
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
21Bernstein EF, Brown DB. Efficacy of the 1·5 millisecond pulse-duration, 585 nm, pulsed-dye laser for treating port-wine stains. Lasers Surg Med 2005; 36: 341–6.
10.1002/lsm.20182
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
22Sivarajan V, Mackay IR. Noninvasive in vivo assessment of vessel characteristics in capillary vascular malformations exposed to five pulsed dye laser treatments. Plast Reconstr Surg 2005; 115: 1245–52.
10.1097/01.PRS.0000156776.03772.FB
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
23Kimel S, Svaasand LO, Hammer-Wilson M et al. Differential vascular response to laser photothermolysis. J Invest Dermatol 1994; 103: 693–700.
10.1111/1523-1747.ep12398548
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
24Verkruysse W. Calculated temperatures in blood vessels assuming temperature dependent blood absorption. In: Improvements to Modeling of Port Wine Stain Laser Treatment ( W Verkruysse, ed.), Amsterdam: Academisch Proefschrift, 1998; 97–108.
Google Scholar
25Yamauchi PS, Soriano TT, Lask G. Treatment of port wine stains using the pulsed-dye laser at 585 nm with the dynamic cooling device. J Cutan Laser Ther 2000; 2: 33–6.
10.1080/14628830050516588
CAS PubMed Google Scholar
26Waldorf HA, Alster TS, McMillan K et al. Effect of dynamic cooling on 585-nm pulsed dye laser therapy of port wine stains. A prospective study. Br J Dermatol 1996; 134: 475–80.
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
27Chang CJ, Nelson JS. Cryogen spray cooling and higher fluence pulsed dye laser treatment improve port-wine stain cleara-nce while minimizing epidermal damage. Dermatol Surg 1999; 25: 767–72.
10.1046/j.1524-4725.1999.99100.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
28Greve B, Hammes S, Raulin C. The effect of cold air cooling on 585 nm pulsed dye laser treatment of port-wine stains. Dermatol Surg 2001; 27: 633–6.
10.1046/j.1524-4725.2001.00352.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
29Hammes S, Roos S, Raulin C et al. Does dye laser treatment with higher fluences in combination with cold air cooling improve the results of port-wine stains? J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2007; 21: 1229–33.
10.1111/j.1468-3083.2007.02246.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
30Burns JA, Kobler JB, Heaton JT et al. Predicting clinical efficacy of photoangiolytic and cutting/ablating lasers using the chick chorioallantoic membrane model: implications for endoscopic voice surgery. Laryngoscope 2008; 118: 1109–24.
10.1097/MLG.0b013e31816902bb
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
31Jackson BA, Arndt KA, Dover JS. Are all 585 nm pulsed dye lasers equivalent? A prospective, comparative, photometric, and histologic study. J Am Acad Dermatol 1996; 34: 1000–4.
10.1016/S0190-9622(96)90278-9
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
32Renfro L, Geronemus RG. Anatomical differences of port-wine stains in response to treatment with the pulsed dye laser. Arch Dermatol 1993; 129: 182–8.
10.1001/archderm.1993.01680230066007
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume172, Issue3

March 2015

Pages 684-691

Prospective comparison treatment of 595-nm pulsed-dye lasers for virgin port-wine stain

Summary

Background

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

References

Citing Literature

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

Prospective comparison treatment of 595-nm pulsed-dye lasers for virgin port-wine stain

Summary

Background

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

References

Citing Literature

References

Related

Information