Comparison of Carbon Dioxide Laser and Surgical Excision for the Treatment of Eyelid Margin Benign Tumors: A Prospective, Randomized, and Single-blind Study.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY Journal of Craniofacial Surgery Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-13 DOI:10.1097/SCS.0000000000011002
Ninghua Liu, Nan Song, Chunming Li, Jing Zhang
{"title":"Comparison of Carbon Dioxide Laser and Surgical Excision for the Treatment of Eyelid Margin Benign Tumors: A Prospective, Randomized, and Single-blind Study.","authors":"Ninghua Liu, Nan Song, Chunming Li, Jing Zhang","doi":"10.1097/SCS.0000000000011002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy between carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) laser excision and surgical excision for the treatment of eyelid margin benign tumors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this single-center, prospective, randomized, and single-blind study, 32 patients diagnosed with eyelid margin benign tumors were enrolled from February 2019 to February 2020 and randomly divided into 2 groups. The sexes, ages, tumor size (length×width), scar, procedure time, physicians' assessment score, patients' satisfaction score, and complications were recorded. Histologic analyses were obtained in all patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant difference in baseline data (sexes, ages, and tumor size) was found between the 2 groups. The mean scar length at 1-week post-treatment in the CO 2 laser excision group was significantly shorter than surgical excision group (0.3±0.1 versus 0.5±0.1 cm, P <0.05), and procedure time in CO 2 laser excision group was significantly shorter than surgical excision group (5.8±1.5 versus 26.7±6.4 min, P <0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the physicians' assessment score and patients' satisfaction score between the 2 groups. During the follow-up period, no severe complications were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared with surgical excision, CO 2 laser excision was a rapid procedure and associated with favorable cosmetic outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":15462,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Craniofacial Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"2064-2067"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Craniofacial Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000011002","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy between carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) laser excision and surgical excision for the treatment of eyelid margin benign tumors.

Methods: In this single-center, prospective, randomized, and single-blind study, 32 patients diagnosed with eyelid margin benign tumors were enrolled from February 2019 to February 2020 and randomly divided into 2 groups. The sexes, ages, tumor size (length×width), scar, procedure time, physicians' assessment score, patients' satisfaction score, and complications were recorded. Histologic analyses were obtained in all patients.

Results: No significant difference in baseline data (sexes, ages, and tumor size) was found between the 2 groups. The mean scar length at 1-week post-treatment in the CO 2 laser excision group was significantly shorter than surgical excision group (0.3±0.1 versus 0.5±0.1 cm, P <0.05), and procedure time in CO 2 laser excision group was significantly shorter than surgical excision group (5.8±1.5 versus 26.7±6.4 min, P <0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the physicians' assessment score and patients' satisfaction score between the 2 groups. During the follow-up period, no severe complications were observed.

Conclusions: Compared with surgical excision, CO 2 laser excision was a rapid procedure and associated with favorable cosmetic outcomes.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
二氧化碳激光与手术切除治疗眼睑边缘良性肿瘤的比较:一项前瞻性、随机、单盲研究。
目的:比较二氧化碳激光切除与外科手术切除治疗睑缘良性肿瘤的安全性和有效性。方法:在这项单中心、前瞻性、随机、单盲研究中,于2019年2月至2020年2月招募32例确诊为眼睑边缘良性肿瘤的患者,随机分为两组。记录患者的性别、年龄、肿瘤大小(length×width)、疤痕、手术时间、医师评估评分、患者满意度评分、并发症。所有患者均进行组织学分析。结果:两组患者的基线数据(性别、年龄、肿瘤大小)无显著差异。术后1周CO2激光切除组瘢痕平均长度明显短于手术切除组(0.3±0.1 cm vs 0.5±0.1 cm)。结论:与手术切除相比,CO2激光切除是一种快速的治疗方法,具有良好的美容效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
11.10%
发文量
968
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: ​The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery serves as a forum of communication for all those involved in craniofacial surgery, maxillofacial surgery and pediatric plastic surgery. Coverage ranges from practical aspects of craniofacial surgery to the basic science that underlies surgical practice. The journal publishes original articles, scientific reviews, editorials and invited commentary, abstracts and selected articles from international journals, and occasional international bibliographies in craniofacial surgery.
期刊最新文献
Age at Surgery Associated With Increased Expressive Language Delays in Children With Single Suture Craniosynostosis. Mixed Reality-Assisted Osteotomy Guidance for Single-Stage Skull Tumor Resection and Cranial Reconstruction: A Brief Clinical Study. Traumatic Orbital Emphysema Mimicking an Orbital Floor Fracture. Review of "Impact of Private Equity Acquisition of Hospitals on Surgical Outcomes" by Rashid Z et al. Ann Surg 2026;283(1):92-99. Scientific Accuracy of Large Language Models in Tilted Implant Dentistry: A Guideline-Based Comparative Evaluation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1