Article

5 Iconography
Access to the text (HTML) Access to the text (HTML)
PDF Access to the PDF text
Advertising


Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription.
  • If you are a subscriber, please sign in 'My Account' at the top right of the screen.

  • If you want to subscribe to this journal, see our rates



Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
Volume 58, n° 3
pages 387-394 (mars 2008)
Doi : 10.1016/j.jaad.2007.11.027
Reports

Long-pulsed dye laser versus long-pulsed dye laser-assisted photodynamic therapy for acne vulgaris: A randomized controlled trial
 

Merete Hædersdal, MD, DrMedSci, PhD , Katrine Togsverd-Bo, MD, Stine Regin Wiegell, MD, Hans Christian Wulf, MD, DrMedSci
Department of Dermatology, Bispebjerg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark 

Reprint requests: Merete Haedersdal, MD, DrMedSci, PhD, Department of Dermatology D-42, Bispebjerg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Bispebjerg Bakke 23, DK-2400 Copenhagen NV, Denmark.
Abstract
Background

Long-pulsed dye laser (LPDL)–assisted photodynamic therapy has been suggested to be superior to laser alone for acne vulgaris but no evidence is available.

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of LPDL alone versus LPDL in photodynamic therapy with methylaminolevulinic acid (MAL-LPDL) for acne vulgaris.

Methods

Fifteen patients received a series of 3 full-face LPDL treatments and half-face prelaser MAL treatments; the latter being randomly assigned to the left or right side.

Results

Inflammatory lesions were reduced more on MAL-LPDL–treated than on LPDL-treated sides (week 4: 70% vs 50%, P = .003; week 12: 80% vs 67%, P = .004). Noninflammatory lesions reduced similarly. Patient satisfaction was slightly greater with MAL-LPDL versus LPDL treatments (scale 0-10: week 4: 7 vs 6, P  = .034; week 12: 8 vs 7.5, P = .034). Fluorescence measurements detected photobleaching with MAL-LPDL (35.3%) and LPDL (7.3%) treatments (P < .001). Erythema, edema, and pustular eruptions intensified from MAL incubation. No patients experienced pigment changes or scarring.

Limitations

The sample size was limited. The split-face design in this randomized controlled trial does not allow us to draw conclusions about the efficacy of the LPDL, only about the efficacy of MAL-LPDL compared with LPDL alone.

Conclusions

MAL-LPDL is slightly superior to LPDL for the treatment of inflammatory acne.

The full text of this article is available in PDF format.

Abbreviations used : ALA, IPL, LPDL, MAL-LPDL, PDL, PDT, RCT



 Funding sources: None.
 Disclosure: V-beam Perfecta was borrowed from Candela Laser Corporation, Wayland, Mass (M. H.). Lectures given for PhotoCure as part of an educational program (by M. H., S. R. W., H. C. W.).



© 2008  American Academy of Dermatology, Inc.@@#104156@@
EM-CONSULTE.COM is registrered at the CNIL, déclaration n° 1286925.
As per the Law relating to information storage and personal integrity, you have the right to oppose (art 26 of that law), access (art 34 of that law) and rectify (art 36 of that law) your personal data. You may thus request that your data, should it be inaccurate, incomplete, unclear, outdated, not be used or stored, be corrected, clarified, updated or deleted.
Personal information regarding our website's visitors, including their identity, is confidential.
The owners of this website hereby guarantee to respect the legal confidentiality conditions, applicable in France, and not to disclose this data to third parties.
Close
Article Outline