$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
The 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser can improve facial aging, such as pores, texture, and brown spots. However, the combination of a 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser with SSA can effectively reduce adverse reactions such as erythema and pigmentation while improving facial aging. The right side of the patient's face was treated with a 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser, while the left side was treated with a 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser combined with 30% supramolecular salicylic acid. At 14 days posttreatment, the erythema on the left side faded faster than on the right side. At 30 days posttreatment, the brown spots, which represent the pigmentation of the face, on the left side were better improved than the right side of the face. In addition, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, half-face controlled trial with 16 patients. The observation found that both treatment methods significantly improved pores and wrinkles compared to baseline (p < 0.05). However, the combination of 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser with 30% supramolecular salicylic acid had better effects on redness and brown spots, with significant improvement from the baseline (p < 0.05), compared to 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser alone, especially for facial redness. At day 30 after the treatment, the redness in the combined therapy group was significantly lower than in the laser alone (Figure 4). Besides, the combination therapy improved faster than the 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser alone in all four parameters. Furthermore, the female facial aging clinical symptom quantitative score13 showed that both treatment methods had significant effects on improving facial aging. However, the combination of 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser with SSA had better effects than using 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser alone (p < 0.05) (as shown in Figure 5). The details of the scoring method are included in Table 1. Representative images of a patient's face taken at different time points during the treatment are shown in Figure 6. Note that the significance of the treatment is not clear in Figure 6.
During each follow-up, the patient is subjected to a skin detection test using a skin detector, and the values obtained from the detector are used for statistical analysis. All the statistical analyses were performed by using GraphPad Prism 9.00 (GraphPad Software). The quantitative data are presented as medians with interquartile ranges, and the differences were compared by the Mann-Whitney test. The differences between different times and groups were compared using two-way ANOVA of repeated measures methods. Two-sided P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Figure 1: M22 intense pulsed light device. The left treatment handpiece is for intense pulsed light therapy, and the right treatment handpiece is for 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser therapy. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 2: Selecting the 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser mode (red rectangle). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 3: 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser parameter adjustment interface. Select the spot shape (red arrow), spot size (yellow arrow), spot density size (blue arrow), and laser energy (green arrow). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 4: Skin testing results of a half-face control test on 16 female patients with facial aging. Compared to the baseline, both treatments significantly improved pores and wrinkles (p < 0.05), with no significant difference between the two treatments (P > 0.05). Compared to the baseline, the 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser combined with 30% super-molecular salicylic acid treatment significantly improved the red and brown areas (p < 0.05), while the 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser alone showed no significant difference compared to the baseline (p > 0.05). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 5: Quantitative clinical symptom scores for female facial aging before and after treatment in a half-face controlled trial of 16 female patients with facial aging. Compared to baseline, both treatments effectively improved the clinical symptoms of facial aging, but the combination of 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser with 30% supramolecular salicylic acid was superior to the 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser alone (p < 0.05). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 6: 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser combined with 30% super molecular salicylic acid improves facial rejuvenation. The patient's left face(L) was treated with 30% ultramolecular salicylic acid immediately after the 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser treatment, while the right face(R) was treated with 1565 nm non-ablative fractional laser treatment alone. (A1, A2, A3) Before treatment. (B1, B2, B3) 1 day after treatment. (C1, C2, C3) 14 days after treatment. (D1, D2, D3) 30 days after treatment. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
| Roughness and Dryness of Facial Skin | Score |
| Roughness or dryness felt in one area of the cheeks, forehead, or mouth area | 1 |
| Roughness or dryness felt in two areas or roughness with scaling in one area | 2 |
| Roughness felt in all areas or roughness with scaling in more than one area | 3 |
| Fine Wrinkles on the Face | Score |
| Faint crow's feet at the corners of the eyes and superficial wrinkles on the forehead | 1 |
| Coarse crow's feet at the corners of the eyes, forehead, and cheeks | 2 |
| Prominent wrinkles at the corners of the eyes, forehead, cheeks, mouth area, and neck | 3 |
| Irregular Pigmentation Changes on the Face | Score |
| Patches mainly on the cheeks, covering less than 30% of the face, with a light brown color and scattered distribution | 1 |
| Yellow-brown patches on both cheeks and forehead, covering more than 50% of the face, with a darker brown color and fused patches | 2 |
| Scattered dark brown patches on the forehead, cheeks, nose sides, and lips, covering over 70% of the face | 3 |
| Pallor of the Face | Score |
| Yellowish complexion with skin radiance | 1 |
| Yellowish complexion without skin radiance | 2 |
| A dry and dull yellowish complexion with no skin radiance | 3 |
| Elasticity of Facial Skin | Score |
| Decent elasticity, with skin recovering quickly after pressing but leaving more wrinkles around the pressed area | 1 |
| Poor elasticity, with skin recovering within 1-2 seconds after pressing | 2 |
| Very poor elasticity, with skin taking more than 2 seconds to recover after pressing | 3 |
| Redness and Burning Sensation of Facial Skin | Score |
| Skin prone to redness and burning sensation, occurring 2-4 times per year | 1 |
| Skin frequently experiencing redness and burning sensation, triggered by seasonal changes or changes in skincare products | 2 |
| Total Score | |
Table 1: The scoring method used in this study.