We have located links that may give you full text access.
CLINICAL TRIAL
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Comparative efficacy of intense pulsed light for different erythema associated with rosacea.
Journal of Cosmetic and Laser Therapy : Official Publication of the European Society for Laser Dermatology 2014 December
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of intense pulsed light (IPL) (540-950 nm) in treating different erythema associated with rosacea.
METHODS: Thirty-two patients with erythematotelangiectatic rosacea (ETR) (n = 16) and papulopustular rosacea (PPR, n = 16) were recruited. Three treatments of IPL (540-950 nm) were administered on the face at 3-week intervals. Clinical improvement in erythema was independently assessed by two dermatologists using a quartile grading scale [0, ≤ 25% improvement (poor); 1, 26-50% improvement (fair); 2, 51-75% improvement (good); and 3, 76-100% improvement (excellent)]. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using a 10-point visual analog scale (VAS: 0, lowest; and 10, highest).
RESULTS: Thirty patients were involved in this study. All patients showed improvement in erythema after three sessions of IPL (540-950 nm) treatment. Based on physician's assessment, the overall clinical improvement in PPR group was significantly higher (mean ± SD of PPR group, 2.167 ± 0.748 vs. ETR group, 1.400 ± 0.541; P = 0.003) and patient satisfaction was also higher in PPR group (mean ± SD of PPR group, 6.867 ± 1.457 vs. ETR group, 5.600 ± 1.502; P = 0.026). The proportion of patients showing > 75% clinical improvement among PPR group was also higher than that among ETR group (5/15 and 0/15, respectively; P = 0.021). Side effects were minimal and transient (erythema and/or edema) for patients.
CONCLUSIONS: IPL (540-950 nm) is a safe and effective treatment for rosacea-associated erythema, especially for perilesional erythema.
METHODS: Thirty-two patients with erythematotelangiectatic rosacea (ETR) (n = 16) and papulopustular rosacea (PPR, n = 16) were recruited. Three treatments of IPL (540-950 nm) were administered on the face at 3-week intervals. Clinical improvement in erythema was independently assessed by two dermatologists using a quartile grading scale [0, ≤ 25% improvement (poor); 1, 26-50% improvement (fair); 2, 51-75% improvement (good); and 3, 76-100% improvement (excellent)]. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using a 10-point visual analog scale (VAS: 0, lowest; and 10, highest).
RESULTS: Thirty patients were involved in this study. All patients showed improvement in erythema after three sessions of IPL (540-950 nm) treatment. Based on physician's assessment, the overall clinical improvement in PPR group was significantly higher (mean ± SD of PPR group, 2.167 ± 0.748 vs. ETR group, 1.400 ± 0.541; P = 0.003) and patient satisfaction was also higher in PPR group (mean ± SD of PPR group, 6.867 ± 1.457 vs. ETR group, 5.600 ± 1.502; P = 0.026). The proportion of patients showing > 75% clinical improvement among PPR group was also higher than that among ETR group (5/15 and 0/15, respectively; P = 0.021). Side effects were minimal and transient (erythema and/or edema) for patients.
CONCLUSIONS: IPL (540-950 nm) is a safe and effective treatment for rosacea-associated erythema, especially for perilesional erythema.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app