ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of photodynamic treatment for port wine stains compared with gold standard pulsed dye laser.MethodsA literature search was performed in PubMed, CENTRAL, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, CQVIP, and Wanfang to identify the clinical randomized controlled studies on photodynamic therapy, pulsed dye laser, and port wine stains, which were published from the establishment of the databases to April 3rd, 2021, and the outcome measurements included effective rate and incidence of adverse reactions. Data were extracted and meta-analysis was performed with RevMan5.3 software, and the quality of evidence was evaluated according to GRADE standards.ResultsThree randomized controlled studies were included, with a total of 268 cases of port wine stains. Meta-analysis results showed that there was no statistically significant difference in the efficacy [relative risk (RR) =1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.89, 1.32), P=0.42] or the incidence of pigmentation [RR=1.03, 95%CI (0.65, 1.65), P=0.89] between photodynamic therapy and pulsed dye laser in the treatment of port wine stains.ConclusionsThe effectiveness and the occurrence of pigmentation of photodynamic therapy on port wine stains are not significantly different from those of pulsed dye laser. Photodynamic therapy is an effective and safe method for the treatment of port wine stains. Due to the limited literature included, large-scale prospective clinical trials are still needed to verify the conclusion.