Intense pulsed light vs. pulsed-dye laser in the treatment of facial acne: a randomized split-face trial

Background  Various laser and light therapy have been increasingly used for the treatment of acne vulgaris. Patients and methods  Twenty patients with facial acne were treated using intense pulsed light (IPL) on one side of the face and pulsed dye laser (PDL) on the other to compare the efficacy and...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology 2010-07, Vol.24 (7), p.773-780
Hauptverfasser: Choi, YS, Suh, HS, Yoon, MY, Min, SU, Lee, DH, Suh, DH
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 780
container_issue 7
container_start_page 773
container_title Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology
container_volume 24
creator Choi, YS
Suh, HS
Yoon, MY
Min, SU
Lee, DH
Suh, DH
description Background  Various laser and light therapy have been increasingly used for the treatment of acne vulgaris. Patients and methods  Twenty patients with facial acne were treated using intense pulsed light (IPL) on one side of the face and pulsed dye laser (PDL) on the other to compare the efficacy and safety of IPL and PDL. Treatment was performed 4 times at 2‐week intervals. Treatment effectiveness was determined using lesion counts, acne severity, patient subjective self‐assessments of improvement, and histopathological examinations, which included immunohistochemical staining for transforming growth factor‐β (TGF‐β). Results  Numbers of total acne lesions decreased following both treatments. For inflammatory lesions such as papules, pustules and nodules, IPL‐treated sides showed an earlier and more profound improvement than PDL‐treated sides. However, at 8 weeks after the 4th treatment, a rebound aggravation of acne was observed on IPL‐treated sides. On the contrary, PDL produced gradual improvements during the treatment sessions and these improvements lasted 8 weeks after the 4th treatment. Non‐inflammatory lesions as open and closed comedones also showed improvement following both treatments and PDL‐treated sides showed better improvement as the study proceeded. Histopathological examinations showed amelioration in inflammatory reactions and an increase in TGF‐β expression after both treatments, which were more prominent for PDL‐treated sides. Conclusion  Both PDL and IPL were found to treat acne effectively, but PDL showed a more sustained effect. TGF‐β might play a key role in the resolution of inflammatory acne lesions.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1468-3083.2009.03525.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_733990602</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>733990602</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4565-7c75ac23439c074386087ee2eba1240795a80791420ec3fab9e2373713437a5e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkE-PEyEYxonRuN3Vr2C4eZrxBYZhMPFgVq27NurBfzdC6TuWOn8qULf108vY2rMcgMDzewg_QiiDkuXxbFOyqm4KAY0oOYAuQUguy_09Mjtf3Ccz0LwutJb6glzGuAEAxmTzkFxkBngtqxlZ3wwJh4h0u-sirmjnv68T_RXL00GxOiDtbMRA_UDTGmkKaFOPQ6JjS1vrvO2odQM-p5YGO6zG3v_ORXHb-VTk-4nImUfkQWtz4-PTekU-v3n96fptsfgwv7l-uShcJWtZKKekdVxUQjtQlWhqaBQix6VlvAKlpW3yzCoO6ERrlxq5UEKxTCgrUVyRp8febRh_7jAm0_vosOvsgOMuGiWE1lADz8nmmHRhjDFga7bB9zYcDAMzaTYbM9k0k00zaTZ_NZt9Rp-cHtkte1ydwX9ec-DFMXDnOzz8d7G5ffVl2mW-OPI-JtyfeRt-mDr_Vpqv7-dmLm_lx8W7b6YWfwBwuZmD</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>733990602</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Intense pulsed light vs. pulsed-dye laser in the treatment of facial acne: a randomized split-face trial</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Choi, YS ; Suh, HS ; Yoon, MY ; Min, SU ; Lee, DH ; Suh, DH</creator><creatorcontrib>Choi, YS ; Suh, HS ; Yoon, MY ; Min, SU ; Lee, DH ; Suh, DH</creatorcontrib><description>Background  Various laser and light therapy have been increasingly used for the treatment of acne vulgaris. Patients and methods  Twenty patients with facial acne were treated using intense pulsed light (IPL) on one side of the face and pulsed dye laser (PDL) on the other to compare the efficacy and safety of IPL and PDL. Treatment was performed 4 times at 2‐week intervals. Treatment effectiveness was determined using lesion counts, acne severity, patient subjective self‐assessments of improvement, and histopathological examinations, which included immunohistochemical staining for transforming growth factor‐β (TGF‐β). Results  Numbers of total acne lesions decreased following both treatments. For inflammatory lesions such as papules, pustules and nodules, IPL‐treated sides showed an earlier and more profound improvement than PDL‐treated sides. However, at 8 weeks after the 4th treatment, a rebound aggravation of acne was observed on IPL‐treated sides. On the contrary, PDL produced gradual improvements during the treatment sessions and these improvements lasted 8 weeks after the 4th treatment. Non‐inflammatory lesions as open and closed comedones also showed improvement following both treatments and PDL‐treated sides showed better improvement as the study proceeded. Histopathological examinations showed amelioration in inflammatory reactions and an increase in TGF‐β expression after both treatments, which were more prominent for PDL‐treated sides. Conclusion  Both PDL and IPL were found to treat acne effectively, but PDL showed a more sustained effect. TGF‐β might play a key role in the resolution of inflammatory acne lesions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0926-9959</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-3083</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-3083.2009.03525.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20002654</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>acne ; Acne Vulgaris - therapy ; Adult ; Face ; Female ; Humans ; intense pulsed light ; Laser Therapy ; Male ; Phototherapy ; pulsed-dye laser ; Single-Blind Method ; transforming growth factor-β</subject><ispartof>Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, 2010-07, Vol.24 (7), p.773-780</ispartof><rights>2009 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2009 European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4565-7c75ac23439c074386087ee2eba1240795a80791420ec3fab9e2373713437a5e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4565-7c75ac23439c074386087ee2eba1240795a80791420ec3fab9e2373713437a5e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1468-3083.2009.03525.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1468-3083.2009.03525.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20002654$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Choi, YS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Suh, HS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yoon, MY</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Min, SU</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, DH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Suh, DH</creatorcontrib><title>Intense pulsed light vs. pulsed-dye laser in the treatment of facial acne: a randomized split-face trial</title><title>Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology</title><addtitle>J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol</addtitle><description>Background  Various laser and light therapy have been increasingly used for the treatment of acne vulgaris. Patients and methods  Twenty patients with facial acne were treated using intense pulsed light (IPL) on one side of the face and pulsed dye laser (PDL) on the other to compare the efficacy and safety of IPL and PDL. Treatment was performed 4 times at 2‐week intervals. Treatment effectiveness was determined using lesion counts, acne severity, patient subjective self‐assessments of improvement, and histopathological examinations, which included immunohistochemical staining for transforming growth factor‐β (TGF‐β). Results  Numbers of total acne lesions decreased following both treatments. For inflammatory lesions such as papules, pustules and nodules, IPL‐treated sides showed an earlier and more profound improvement than PDL‐treated sides. However, at 8 weeks after the 4th treatment, a rebound aggravation of acne was observed on IPL‐treated sides. On the contrary, PDL produced gradual improvements during the treatment sessions and these improvements lasted 8 weeks after the 4th treatment. Non‐inflammatory lesions as open and closed comedones also showed improvement following both treatments and PDL‐treated sides showed better improvement as the study proceeded. Histopathological examinations showed amelioration in inflammatory reactions and an increase in TGF‐β expression after both treatments, which were more prominent for PDL‐treated sides. Conclusion  Both PDL and IPL were found to treat acne effectively, but PDL showed a more sustained effect. TGF‐β might play a key role in the resolution of inflammatory acne lesions.</description><subject>acne</subject><subject>Acne Vulgaris - therapy</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Face</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>intense pulsed light</subject><subject>Laser Therapy</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Phototherapy</subject><subject>pulsed-dye laser</subject><subject>Single-Blind Method</subject><subject>transforming growth factor-β</subject><issn>0926-9959</issn><issn>1468-3083</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkE-PEyEYxonRuN3Vr2C4eZrxBYZhMPFgVq27NurBfzdC6TuWOn8qULf108vY2rMcgMDzewg_QiiDkuXxbFOyqm4KAY0oOYAuQUguy_09Mjtf3Ccz0LwutJb6glzGuAEAxmTzkFxkBngtqxlZ3wwJh4h0u-sirmjnv68T_RXL00GxOiDtbMRA_UDTGmkKaFOPQ6JjS1vrvO2odQM-p5YGO6zG3v_ORXHb-VTk-4nImUfkQWtz4-PTekU-v3n96fptsfgwv7l-uShcJWtZKKekdVxUQjtQlWhqaBQix6VlvAKlpW3yzCoO6ERrlxq5UEKxTCgrUVyRp8febRh_7jAm0_vosOvsgOMuGiWE1lADz8nmmHRhjDFga7bB9zYcDAMzaTYbM9k0k00zaTZ_NZt9Rp-cHtkte1ydwX9ec-DFMXDnOzz8d7G5ffVl2mW-OPI-JtyfeRt-mDr_Vpqv7-dmLm_lx8W7b6YWfwBwuZmD</recordid><startdate>201007</startdate><enddate>201007</enddate><creator>Choi, YS</creator><creator>Suh, HS</creator><creator>Yoon, MY</creator><creator>Min, SU</creator><creator>Lee, DH</creator><creator>Suh, DH</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201007</creationdate><title>Intense pulsed light vs. pulsed-dye laser in the treatment of facial acne: a randomized split-face trial</title><author>Choi, YS ; Suh, HS ; Yoon, MY ; Min, SU ; Lee, DH ; Suh, DH</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4565-7c75ac23439c074386087ee2eba1240795a80791420ec3fab9e2373713437a5e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>acne</topic><topic>Acne Vulgaris - therapy</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Face</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>intense pulsed light</topic><topic>Laser Therapy</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Phototherapy</topic><topic>pulsed-dye laser</topic><topic>Single-Blind Method</topic><topic>transforming growth factor-β</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Choi, YS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Suh, HS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yoon, MY</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Min, SU</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, DH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Suh, DH</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Choi, YS</au><au>Suh, HS</au><au>Yoon, MY</au><au>Min, SU</au><au>Lee, DH</au><au>Suh, DH</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Intense pulsed light vs. pulsed-dye laser in the treatment of facial acne: a randomized split-face trial</atitle><jtitle>Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology</jtitle><addtitle>J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol</addtitle><date>2010-07</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>24</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>773</spage><epage>780</epage><pages>773-780</pages><issn>0926-9959</issn><eissn>1468-3083</eissn><abstract>Background  Various laser and light therapy have been increasingly used for the treatment of acne vulgaris. Patients and methods  Twenty patients with facial acne were treated using intense pulsed light (IPL) on one side of the face and pulsed dye laser (PDL) on the other to compare the efficacy and safety of IPL and PDL. Treatment was performed 4 times at 2‐week intervals. Treatment effectiveness was determined using lesion counts, acne severity, patient subjective self‐assessments of improvement, and histopathological examinations, which included immunohistochemical staining for transforming growth factor‐β (TGF‐β). Results  Numbers of total acne lesions decreased following both treatments. For inflammatory lesions such as papules, pustules and nodules, IPL‐treated sides showed an earlier and more profound improvement than PDL‐treated sides. However, at 8 weeks after the 4th treatment, a rebound aggravation of acne was observed on IPL‐treated sides. On the contrary, PDL produced gradual improvements during the treatment sessions and these improvements lasted 8 weeks after the 4th treatment. Non‐inflammatory lesions as open and closed comedones also showed improvement following both treatments and PDL‐treated sides showed better improvement as the study proceeded. Histopathological examinations showed amelioration in inflammatory reactions and an increase in TGF‐β expression after both treatments, which were more prominent for PDL‐treated sides. Conclusion  Both PDL and IPL were found to treat acne effectively, but PDL showed a more sustained effect. TGF‐β might play a key role in the resolution of inflammatory acne lesions.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>20002654</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1468-3083.2009.03525.x</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0926-9959
ispartof Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, 2010-07, Vol.24 (7), p.773-780
issn 0926-9959
1468-3083
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_733990602
source MEDLINE; Access via Wiley Online Library
subjects acne
Acne Vulgaris - therapy
Adult
Face
Female
Humans
intense pulsed light
Laser Therapy
Male
Phototherapy
pulsed-dye laser
Single-Blind Method
transforming growth factor-β
title Intense pulsed light vs. pulsed-dye laser in the treatment of facial acne: a randomized split-face trial
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T20%3A46%3A12IST&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=Intense%20pulsed%20light%20vs.%20pulsed-dye%20laser%20in%20the%20treatment%20of%20facial%20acne:%20a%20randomized%20split-face%20trial&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20the%20European%20Academy%20of%20Dermatology%20and%20Venereology&rft.au=Choi,%20YS&rft.date=2010-07&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=773&rft.epage=780&rft.pages=773-780&rft.issn=0926-9959&rft.eissn=1468-3083&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1468-3083.2009.03525.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E733990602%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=733990602&rft_id=info:pmid/20002654&rfr_iscdi=true