Photodiagnosis and photodynamic therapy · 2022
Efficacy of two different methods of cold air analgesia for pain relief in PDT of actinic keratoses of the head region - a randomized controlled comparison study.
Рандомизированное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Silic Katarina, Kammer Michael, Sator Paul-Günther, Tanew Adrian, Radakovic Sonja
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is an effective method for treating actinic keratosis (AK) with pain during illumination representing the major side effect. The efficacy of two different cooling methods for pain relief in PDT of AK in the head region was compared.
METHODS: Randomized, assessor-blinded, half side comparison study in 20 patients with symmetrically distributed AK on the head. Conventional PDT was performed on both halves of the scalp or face by applying 20% aminolevulinic acid cream (ALA) and subsequent illumination with incoherent red light. During illumination one side was cooled with a cold air blower (CAB) and the other with a standard fan (FAN) in a randomized fashion. Pain and skin temperature were recorded during and after PDT. The phototoxic skin reaction was evaluated up to seven days after PDT. The clearance rate of AK was assessed at 3 and 6 months after PDT.
RESULTS: Mean pain (VASmean), maximum pain intensity (VASmax) and the mean skin temperature during PDT were significantly lower with CAB as compared to FAN (VASmean: 2.7 ± 1.4 vs. 3.7 ± 2.1, p = 0.003; VASmax: 3.8 ± 2.0 vs. 4.8 ± 2.5, p = 0.002; 26.8 ± 2.0 °C vs. 32.1 ± 1.7 °C; p=<0.001). The severity of the phototoxic skin reaction and the clearance rate of AK did not differ between the two cooling methods.
CONCLUSION: Cooling with CAB during PDT has a greater analgesic effect than cooling with FAN. Patients with a lower skin temperature during illumination tended to experience less pain, however, this effect did not reach the level of statistical significance.
METHODS: Randomized, assessor-blinded, half side comparison study in 20 patients with symmetrically distributed AK on the head. Conventional PDT was performed on both halves of the scalp or face by applying 20% aminolevulinic acid cream (ALA) and subsequent illumination with incoherent red light. During illumination one side was cooled with a cold air blower (CAB) and the other with a standard fan (FAN) in a randomized fashion. Pain and skin temperature were recorded during and after PDT. The phototoxic skin reaction was evaluated up to seven days after PDT. The clearance rate of AK was assessed at 3 and 6 months after PDT.
RESULTS: Mean pain (VASmean), maximum pain intensity (VASmax) and the mean skin temperature during PDT were significantly lower with CAB as compared to FAN (VASmean: 2.7 ± 1.4 vs. 3.7 ± 2.1, p = 0.003; VASmax: 3.8 ± 2.0 vs. 4.8 ± 2.5, p = 0.002; 26.8 ± 2.0 °C vs. 32.1 ± 1.7 °C; p=<0.001). The severity of the phototoxic skin reaction and the clearance rate of AK did not differ between the two cooling methods.
CONCLUSION: Cooling with CAB during PDT has a greater analgesic effect than cooling with FAN. Patients with a lower skin temperature during illumination tended to experience less pain, however, this effect did not reach the level of statistical significance.