Diagnosis and Management of Infantile Hemangioma

Table 21. Resolution outcomes in studies comparing timolol and laser
Author, Year
Comparison Groups
(n)
Quality
Tawfik et al. 2015 14
G1: Topical timolol
ophthalmic 0.5%
solution (30)
G2: Combined
sequential laser PDL
(585 nm) and Nd:YAG
(1064 nm) (30)
Quality: Fair
Age, Months
Type
Age, n (%)
≤ 6 months
G1: 8 (26.7)
G2: 14 (46.7)
> 6 months
G1: 22 (73.3)
G2: 16 (53.3)
Type, %
Superficial
G1: 80
G2: 86.7
Mixed
G1: 20
G2: 13.3
Location
G1+G2:
multiple
Methods and
Measures of
Resolution/Response
• Photographs
• Efficacy evaluated by
two blinded
physicians
• Response to
treatment graded
Excellent: 76-100%
improvement
Good: 51-75%
Moderate: 26-50%
Mild: < 25%
No improvement: 0%
Resolution
Outcomes, n
Response to
treatment, n
(%)
Excellent
G1: 9 (30)
G2: 3 (10)
Good
G1: 9 (30)
G2: 7 (23)
Moderate
G1: 4 (13)
G2: 9 (30)
Mild
G1: 4 (13)
G2: 7 (23)
Poor
G1: 4 (13)
G2: 4 (13)
Rebound
Growth/
Recurrence
Other
Outcomes
No rebound
growth in either
group
Park et al. 2014 106
G1: Timolol ophthalmic
0.5% solution (61)
G2: Combination topical
timolol ophthalmic 0.5%
solution plus adjunctive
pulsed dye laser
treatment (41)
Quality: Poor
Age, Months
NR
Type, %
Superficial
G1+G2: 100%
G1+G2:
multiple
• Photographs
• Clinical evaluation of
efficacy by two
independent
physicians Global
assessment score
(GAS)
4: 75-100%
improvement
3: 50-74%
2: 25-49%
1: 0-24%
0: 0
-1: < 0
Mean GAS
score change
G1: 1.88
G2: 2.66)
G1 vs.G2:
p=0.018
%
improvement,
n (%)
75-100
G1: 14 (23)
G2: 17 (41)
50-74
G1: 14 (23)
G2: 12 (29)
NR
25-49
G1: 11 (18)
G2: 8 (20)
0-24
G1: 19 (31)
G2: 4 (10)
≤0
G1: 3 (5)
G2: 0
G = group; GAS = global assessment score; n = number; nm = nanometer; NR = not reported
58