Rosacea treatment with 532 nm KTP versus 595 nm pulsed dye laser—A prospective, controlled study
Background Pulsed‐dye lasers (PDL) are one of the standard therapies for rosacea, but alternatives are needed. Aims To compare the efficacy and safety of the variable‐sequenced, large‐spot 532 nm KTP laser to the 595 nm PDL in treating rosacea. Materials and Methods A prospective, controlled, evalua...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of cosmetic dermatology 2024-07, Vol.23 (7), p.2443-2449 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 2449 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 7 |
| container_start_page | 2443 |
| container_title | Journal of cosmetic dermatology |
| container_volume | 23 |
| creator | Nguyen, Lynhda Dierckxsens, Cathy Kerscher, Martina Hartjen, Anna Schneider, Stefan W. Herberger, Katharina |
| description | Background
Pulsed‐dye lasers (PDL) are one of the standard therapies for rosacea, but alternatives are needed.
Aims
To compare the efficacy and safety of the variable‐sequenced, large‐spot 532 nm KTP laser to the 595 nm PDL in treating rosacea.
Materials and Methods
A prospective, controlled, evaluator‐blinded study. Patients were treated with either a KTP or PDL with 1–3 sessions at intervals of 6–8 weeks. A follow‐up visit was scheduled on Week 6 post‐treatment. Clinical outcome was assessed by computer‐assisted analysis and by patients and two blinded dermatologists. Pain intensity during treatment and adverse events were documented.
Results
Forty‐five patients (mean age 51 years) were allocated in a 2:1 ratio to either the KTP or PDL. Erythema in both treatment arms decreased significantly (p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/jocd.16300 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3037394518</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3037394518</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3240-b32c937c790bbb9b17fed14e44e86e7bccbd7037038f231f6924928f9964456f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1Lw0AQhhdRbK1e_AGyRxFTd7ObTfZY6reFitRzSDazmJKPmk1acuvVu7-wv8StqT06DMwwPPPy8iJ0TsmQ2rqZlyoZUsEIOUB9yn3muFR4h_udkR46MWZOCPUl9Y5RjwWCEOHxPtJvpYkURLiuIKpzKGq8SusP7DF3s_4qcvwye8VLqExjsCe97rZoMgMJTlrAWWSg2qy_R3hRlWYBqk6XcI1VWdRVmWWWMnWTtKfoSEf26Ww3B-j9_m42fnQm04en8WjiKOZy4sTMVZL5ypckjmMZU19DQjlwDoEAP1YqTnzCbAfaZVQL6XLpBlpKwbknNBugy07XuvlswNRhnhoFWRYVUDYmZPaZSe7RwKJXHaqscVOBDhdVmkdVG1ISbnMNt7mGv7la-GKn28Q5JHv0L0gL0A5YpRm0_0iFz9PxbSf6A_OVhIQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3037394518</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Rosacea treatment with 532 nm KTP versus 595 nm pulsed dye laser—A prospective, controlled study</title><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><source>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</source><creator>Nguyen, Lynhda ; Dierckxsens, Cathy ; Kerscher, Martina ; Hartjen, Anna ; Schneider, Stefan W. ; Herberger, Katharina</creator><creatorcontrib>Nguyen, Lynhda ; Dierckxsens, Cathy ; Kerscher, Martina ; Hartjen, Anna ; Schneider, Stefan W. ; Herberger, Katharina</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Pulsed‐dye lasers (PDL) are one of the standard therapies for rosacea, but alternatives are needed.
Aims
To compare the efficacy and safety of the variable‐sequenced, large‐spot 532 nm KTP laser to the 595 nm PDL in treating rosacea.
Materials and Methods
A prospective, controlled, evaluator‐blinded study. Patients were treated with either a KTP or PDL with 1–3 sessions at intervals of 6–8 weeks. A follow‐up visit was scheduled on Week 6 post‐treatment. Clinical outcome was assessed by computer‐assisted analysis and by patients and two blinded dermatologists. Pain intensity during treatment and adverse events were documented.
Results
Forty‐five patients (mean age 51 years) were allocated in a 2:1 ratio to either the KTP or PDL. Erythema in both treatment arms decreased significantly (p < 0.01). Clinical evaluation revealed high improvement. Mean pain intensity was significantly lower with the KTP (2.5/10) than with the PDL (4.1/10). Both lasers showed a good safety profile. Relevant purpura was only seen in the PDL group.
Conclusions
Both the variable‐sequenced, large‐spot KTP and the PDL demonstrated comparable efficacy in treatment of rosacea. Regarding safety, the KTP exhibited fewer post‐treatment reactions. The KTP might serve as a potential alternative to PDL in the treatment of rosacea.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1473-2130</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1473-2165</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1473-2165</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/jocd.16300</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38600654</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England</publisher><subject>erythema ; KTP ; pulsed dye laser ; rosacea ; telangiectasia</subject><ispartof>Journal of cosmetic dermatology, 2024-07, Vol.23 (7), p.2443-2449</ispartof><rights>2024 The Authors. published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.</rights><rights>2024 The Authors. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3240-b32c937c790bbb9b17fed14e44e86e7bccbd7037038f231f6924928f9964456f3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1258-6390</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fjocd.16300$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fjocd.16300$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,11562,27924,27925,45574,45575,46052,46476</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38600654$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nguyen, Lynhda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dierckxsens, Cathy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kerscher, Martina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hartjen, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Stefan W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herberger, Katharina</creatorcontrib><title>Rosacea treatment with 532 nm KTP versus 595 nm pulsed dye laser—A prospective, controlled study</title><title>Journal of cosmetic dermatology</title><addtitle>J Cosmet Dermatol</addtitle><description>Background
Pulsed‐dye lasers (PDL) are one of the standard therapies for rosacea, but alternatives are needed.
Aims
To compare the efficacy and safety of the variable‐sequenced, large‐spot 532 nm KTP laser to the 595 nm PDL in treating rosacea.
Materials and Methods
A prospective, controlled, evaluator‐blinded study. Patients were treated with either a KTP or PDL with 1–3 sessions at intervals of 6–8 weeks. A follow‐up visit was scheduled on Week 6 post‐treatment. Clinical outcome was assessed by computer‐assisted analysis and by patients and two blinded dermatologists. Pain intensity during treatment and adverse events were documented.
Results
Forty‐five patients (mean age 51 years) were allocated in a 2:1 ratio to either the KTP or PDL. Erythema in both treatment arms decreased significantly (p < 0.01). Clinical evaluation revealed high improvement. Mean pain intensity was significantly lower with the KTP (2.5/10) than with the PDL (4.1/10). Both lasers showed a good safety profile. Relevant purpura was only seen in the PDL group.
Conclusions
Both the variable‐sequenced, large‐spot KTP and the PDL demonstrated comparable efficacy in treatment of rosacea. Regarding safety, the KTP exhibited fewer post‐treatment reactions. The KTP might serve as a potential alternative to PDL in the treatment of rosacea.</description><subject>erythema</subject><subject>KTP</subject><subject>pulsed dye laser</subject><subject>rosacea</subject><subject>telangiectasia</subject><issn>1473-2130</issn><issn>1473-2165</issn><issn>1473-2165</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1Lw0AQhhdRbK1e_AGyRxFTd7ObTfZY6reFitRzSDazmJKPmk1acuvVu7-wv8StqT06DMwwPPPy8iJ0TsmQ2rqZlyoZUsEIOUB9yn3muFR4h_udkR46MWZOCPUl9Y5RjwWCEOHxPtJvpYkURLiuIKpzKGq8SusP7DF3s_4qcvwye8VLqExjsCe97rZoMgMJTlrAWWSg2qy_R3hRlWYBqk6XcI1VWdRVmWWWMnWTtKfoSEf26Ww3B-j9_m42fnQm04en8WjiKOZy4sTMVZL5ypckjmMZU19DQjlwDoEAP1YqTnzCbAfaZVQL6XLpBlpKwbknNBugy07XuvlswNRhnhoFWRYVUDYmZPaZSe7RwKJXHaqscVOBDhdVmkdVG1ISbnMNt7mGv7la-GKn28Q5JHv0L0gL0A5YpRm0_0iFz9PxbSf6A_OVhIQ</recordid><startdate>202407</startdate><enddate>202407</enddate><creator>Nguyen, Lynhda</creator><creator>Dierckxsens, Cathy</creator><creator>Kerscher, Martina</creator><creator>Hartjen, Anna</creator><creator>Schneider, Stefan W.</creator><creator>Herberger, Katharina</creator><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1258-6390</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202407</creationdate><title>Rosacea treatment with 532 nm KTP versus 595 nm pulsed dye laser—A prospective, controlled study</title><author>Nguyen, Lynhda ; Dierckxsens, Cathy ; Kerscher, Martina ; Hartjen, Anna ; Schneider, Stefan W. ; Herberger, Katharina</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3240-b32c937c790bbb9b17fed14e44e86e7bccbd7037038f231f6924928f9964456f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>erythema</topic><topic>KTP</topic><topic>pulsed dye laser</topic><topic>rosacea</topic><topic>telangiectasia</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nguyen, Lynhda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dierckxsens, Cathy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kerscher, Martina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hartjen, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Stefan W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herberger, Katharina</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</collection><collection>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of cosmetic dermatology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nguyen, Lynhda</au><au>Dierckxsens, Cathy</au><au>Kerscher, Martina</au><au>Hartjen, Anna</au><au>Schneider, Stefan W.</au><au>Herberger, Katharina</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Rosacea treatment with 532 nm KTP versus 595 nm pulsed dye laser—A prospective, controlled study</atitle><jtitle>Journal of cosmetic dermatology</jtitle><addtitle>J Cosmet Dermatol</addtitle><date>2024-07</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>23</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>2443</spage><epage>2449</epage><pages>2443-2449</pages><issn>1473-2130</issn><issn>1473-2165</issn><eissn>1473-2165</eissn><abstract>Background
Pulsed‐dye lasers (PDL) are one of the standard therapies for rosacea, but alternatives are needed.
Aims
To compare the efficacy and safety of the variable‐sequenced, large‐spot 532 nm KTP laser to the 595 nm PDL in treating rosacea.
Materials and Methods
A prospective, controlled, evaluator‐blinded study. Patients were treated with either a KTP or PDL with 1–3 sessions at intervals of 6–8 weeks. A follow‐up visit was scheduled on Week 6 post‐treatment. Clinical outcome was assessed by computer‐assisted analysis and by patients and two blinded dermatologists. Pain intensity during treatment and adverse events were documented.
Results
Forty‐five patients (mean age 51 years) were allocated in a 2:1 ratio to either the KTP or PDL. Erythema in both treatment arms decreased significantly (p < 0.01). Clinical evaluation revealed high improvement. Mean pain intensity was significantly lower with the KTP (2.5/10) than with the PDL (4.1/10). Both lasers showed a good safety profile. Relevant purpura was only seen in the PDL group.
Conclusions
Both the variable‐sequenced, large‐spot KTP and the PDL demonstrated comparable efficacy in treatment of rosacea. Regarding safety, the KTP exhibited fewer post‐treatment reactions. The KTP might serve as a potential alternative to PDL in the treatment of rosacea.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pmid>38600654</pmid><doi>10.1111/jocd.16300</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1258-6390</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1473-2130 |
| ispartof | Journal of cosmetic dermatology, 2024-07, Vol.23 (7), p.2443-2449 |
| issn | 1473-2130 1473-2165 1473-2165 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3037394518 |
| source | Access via Wiley Online Library; Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection) |
| subjects | erythema KTP pulsed dye laser rosacea telangiectasia |
| title | Rosacea treatment with 532 nm KTP versus 595 nm pulsed dye laser—A prospective, controlled study |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T02%3A29%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Rosacea%20treatment%20with%20532%E2%80%89nm%20KTP%20versus%20595%E2%80%89nm%20pulsed%20dye%20laser%E2%80%94A%20prospective,%20controlled%20study&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20cosmetic%20dermatology&rft.au=Nguyen,%20Lynhda&rft.date=2024-07&rft.volume=23&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=2443&rft.epage=2449&rft.pages=2443-2449&rft.issn=1473-2130&rft.eissn=1473-2165&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/jocd.16300&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3037394518%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3037394518&rft_id=info:pmid/38600654&rfr_iscdi=true |