ReviewLasers in medical science2026
Laser-based therapies in the management of non-melanoma skin cancers: a narrative review.
Review in Lasers in medical science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rising global incidence of basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) necessitates the exploration of tissue-sparing alternatives to surgical excision, which remains the gold standard. Laser systems (CO₂, Nd: YAG, PDL) offer a less invasive approach using selective photothermolysis, addressing functional and aesthetic concerns in anatomically sensitive areas. This narrative review summarizes the current clinical data on laser-based strategies for non-melanoma skin cancers (NMSC), focusing on treatment parameters, patient/lesion selection, oncologic outcomes (clearance and recurrence), and safety. A targeted search of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus up to May 2026 was synthesized narratively. For low-risk BCC, Nd: YAG lasers showed a 3.1% recurrence rate (7.9-year follow-up), while CO₂ lasers reported 9.4% (2.1-year follow-up). Pulsed dye laser (PDL) monotherapy was less reliable, with 38% recurrence. Evidence for cSCC remains limited, focusing on in situ disease and combined regimens. Integrating Reflectance Confocal Microscopy (RCM) and Laser-Assisted Drug Delivery (LADD) significantly improves oncologic efficacy and treatment depth. Laser therapy, particularly Nd: YAG and CO₂ systems, represents a viable tissue-sparing option primarily for low-risk BCC. However, evidence for cSCC remains limited and suggests higher recurrence rates, necessitating cautious patient selection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.