Lasers in surgery and medicine · 2022
A randomized split-face comparative study of long-pulsed alexandrite plus low-fluence Nd:YAG laser versus pulsed-dye laser in the treatment of rosacea.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Park Sujin, Lee Joo Hee, Kang Eunji, Kim Hyun, Kim Ji Young, Lee Eun Jung, Bae Yu Jeong, Kim Jihee, Oh Sang Ho
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of long-pulsed alexandrite laser (LPAL) with that of pulsed-dye laser (PDL) for rosacea.
METHODS: This was a single-blind randomized controlled trial on 27 patients who were clinically diagnosed with rosacea. Randomly assigned split face in each patient received four times monthly treatment of LPAL plus low-fluence Nd:YAG with the contralateral side serving as the control treated with PDL. At every visit, the erythema index (EI) was measured with skin analysis systems, and two independent dermatologists evaluated digital photographs for five-point global aesthetic improvement scale (GAIS).
RESULTS: The EI significantly decreased on both treated sides (LPAL 366.5 ± 101.0 vs. 295.8 ± 90.2, p < 0.001, PDL 369.0 ± 124.3 vs. 302.7 ± 92.1, p < 0.001) 1 month after fourth treatment (visit 5). Also 3 months after the fourth treatment (visit 6), the reduction in the EI was well maintained on both sides (LPAL 360.3 ± 96.8 vs. 282.0 ± 89.2, p < 0.001, PDL 364.3 ± 121.6 vs. 281.6 ± 97.8, p < 0.001). When comparing the improvement in the EI between the two groups, the percentage reduction in the EI on the LPAL-treated side was not inferior to the PDL-treated side (visit 5: LPAL 18.7 ± 15.7% vs. PDL 16.4 ± 12.9%, p = 0.501 and visit 6: LPAL 21.7 ± 13.9% vs. PDL 21.9 ± 15.2%, p = 0.943). The GAIS and patient satisfaction were comparable between the LPAL and PDL sides and did not show any significant difference. No serious adverse events occurred on either of the treated sides.
CONCLUSION: This study showed that the decrease in EI in the treatment of rosacea was comparable between PDL and LPAL. Therefore, LPAL could be a promising alternative treatment option with good merits for rosacea, considering no consumables are required for device maintenance.
METHODS: This was a single-blind randomized controlled trial on 27 patients who were clinically diagnosed with rosacea. Randomly assigned split face in each patient received four times monthly treatment of LPAL plus low-fluence Nd:YAG with the contralateral side serving as the control treated with PDL. At every visit, the erythema index (EI) was measured with skin analysis systems, and two independent dermatologists evaluated digital photographs for five-point global aesthetic improvement scale (GAIS).
RESULTS: The EI significantly decreased on both treated sides (LPAL 366.5 ± 101.0 vs. 295.8 ± 90.2, p < 0.001, PDL 369.0 ± 124.3 vs. 302.7 ± 92.1, p < 0.001) 1 month after fourth treatment (visit 5). Also 3 months after the fourth treatment (visit 6), the reduction in the EI was well maintained on both sides (LPAL 360.3 ± 96.8 vs. 282.0 ± 89.2, p < 0.001, PDL 364.3 ± 121.6 vs. 281.6 ± 97.8, p < 0.001). When comparing the improvement in the EI between the two groups, the percentage reduction in the EI on the LPAL-treated side was not inferior to the PDL-treated side (visit 5: LPAL 18.7 ± 15.7% vs. PDL 16.4 ± 12.9%, p = 0.501 and visit 6: LPAL 21.7 ± 13.9% vs. PDL 21.9 ± 15.2%, p = 0.943). The GAIS and patient satisfaction were comparable between the LPAL and PDL sides and did not show any significant difference. No serious adverse events occurred on either of the treated sides.
CONCLUSION: This study showed that the decrease in EI in the treatment of rosacea was comparable between PDL and LPAL. Therefore, LPAL could be a promising alternative treatment option with good merits for rosacea, considering no consumables are required for device maintenance.