Lasers in Medical Science

, Volume 34, Issue 1, pp 93–98 | Cite as

Treatment of erythematotelangiectatic rosacea, facial erythema, and facial telangiectasia with a 577-nm pro-yellow laser: a case series

  • Yelda Kapicioglu
  • Gulbahar SaracEmail author
  • Hulya Cenk
Original Article


Various lasers have been used for the treatment of erythematotelangiectatic rosacea (ETR), facial erythema (FE), and facial telangiectasias (FT). The assessment of the treatments of all of these conditions with a 577-nm pro-yellow laser has not been reported yet. The aim of this work was to assess the efficacy and safety of the 577-nm pro-yellow laser in ETR, FE, and FT. Forty patients suffering from ETR, FE, and FT (25 female and 15 male) were enrolled in this study. All of the patients were treated with 577-nm pro-yellow laser (QuadroStarPRO YELLOW® Asclepion Laser Technologies, Germany) at 4-week intervals, for one to four sessions. The assessment of the treatment was made based on the digital photographs and the percentage of fading of the erythema and telangiectasias in the lesions. Significant clinical improvement (80–100%) was observed in the first or second sessions of the treatment in FE and ETR patients and in second and fourth sessions of the treatment in FT patients. The treatment was very well tolerated. No side effect was observed except for a few patients who had mild to moderate erythema fading away in 12–24 h. This case series has shown that the pro-yellow laser is a very effective, safe, and well-tolerated treatment for ETR, FE, and FT.


Treatment of rosacea Laser treatment Pro-yellow laser Facial erythema 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The study has been conducted retrospectively. All procedures performed in this study on human participants were in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration, and its later amendments.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all the patients included in the study.


  1. 1.
    McCoy SE (1997) Copper bromide laser treatment of facial telangiectasia: results of patients treated over five years. Lasers Surg Med 21(4):329–340CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Owen WR, Hoppe E (2012) Copper bromide laser for facial telangiectasia: a dose response evaluation. Australas J Dermatol 53(4):281–284CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alam M, Voravutinon N, Warycha M, Whiting D, Nodzenski M, Yoo S, West DP, Veledar E, Poon E (2013) Comparative effectiveness of nonpurpuragenic 595-nm pulsed dye laser and microsecond 1064-nm neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser for treatment of diffuse facial erythema: A double-blind randomized controlled trial. J Am Acad Dermatol 69(3):438–443CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Laube S, Lanigan SW (2002) Laser treatment of rosacea. J Cosmet Dermatol 1(4):188–195CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Micali G, Gerber PA, Lacarrubba F, Schäfer G (2016) Improving Treatment of Erythematotelangiectatic Rosacea with Laser and/or Topical Therapy Through Enhanced Discrimination of its Clinical Features. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 9(7):30–39PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Handler MZ, Bloom BS, Goldberg DJ (2017) IPL vs PDL in treatment of facial erythema: A split- face study. J Cosmet Dermatol 16(4):450–453CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hare McCoppin HH, Goldberg DJ (2010) Laser treatment of facial telangiectases: an update. Dermatol Surg 36(8):1221–1230CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yoo KH, Kim BJ, Kim MN (2009) Efficacy of high-energy copper bromide laser (511 and 578 nm) with for deep infantile haemangioma. Clin Exp Dermatol 34(7):e451–e452CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Remington BK (1983) Argon laser therapy – rosacea, telangiectasia. J Dermatol Surg Oncol 9:424CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thibault PK (1997) A patient’s questionnaire evaluation of krypton laser treatment of facial telangiectases. A comparison with the copper vapor laser. Dermatol Surg 23(1):37–41CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Clark SM, Lanigan SW, Marks R (2002) Laser treatment of erythema and telangiectasia associated with rosacea. Lasers Med Sci 17:26–33CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee S, Lee T, Kim H, Kim J, Eun H, Kim R (2013) A practical comparison of Copper Bromide Laser for the treatment of vascular lesions. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2013:3765–3768PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gao L, Gao N, Song W, Dang E, Yin R, Wang L, Wang G (2017) A Retrospective Study on Efficacy of Pulsed Dye Laser and Intense Pulsed Light for the Treatment of Facial Telangiectasia. J Drugs Dermatol 16(11):1112–1116PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ting PT, Rao J (2011) Vascular lesions. Curr Probl Dermatol 42:67–80CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Dermatology, Turgut Ozal Medical CenterInonu University Faculty Of MedicineMalatyaTurkey
  2. 2.Department of DermatologyMalatya Training and Research HospitalMalatyaTurkey

Personalised recommendations