Email Alert | RSS

Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences) ›› 2022, Vol. 54 ›› Issue (2): 283-288. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2022.02.014

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Clinical efficacy of 585 nm Q-switched laser treatment on inflammatory lesion and postinflammatory erythema of acne vulgaris

WANG Xiang-xi,LI Zhen-zhen,LAI Yan-yun,YANG Li,SHI Lin-li,ZHONG Shao-min,WU Yan()   

  1. National Medical Products Administration Key Laboratory for Quality Control and Evaluation of Cosmetics, Beijing 100034, China
  • Received:2021-04-11 Online:2022-04-18 Published:2022-04-13
  • Contact: Yan WU E-mail:3437477565@qq.com

RICH HTML

   

PDF (PC)

Abstract:

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 585 nm Q-switched laser in the treatment of acne inflammatory lesions and postinflammatory erythema. Methods: A total of 25 patients with moderate facial acne, symmetrical distribution of inflammatory lesions and postinflammatory erythema on both sides of the face, were enrolled. Among the 25 patients, 22 patients completed all the treatment and evaluation, and 3 patients were lost to follow-up. 585 nm Q-switched laser was used on a randomly selected side of the face for three times of treatment at a 2 week interval. The evaluations were made before each treatment, 2 and 4 weeks after the last treatment, therefore the evaluation time points were before the treatment, weeks 2, 4, 6, and 8, respectively, for a total of 5 times. Acne severity was assessed using the investigator’s global assessment (IGA) score, and erythema severity was assessed using the investigator’s subjective erythema score and narrow-spectrum reflectance spectrophotometer at each follow-up. Results: After 3 times of treatment, there was statistically significant difference between the IGA score in week 8 and before treatment on both sides(Z=2.64, P<0.01; Z=2.67, P<0.01). There was no significant difference in IGA score between the treatment side and the control side before treatment and in week 8 (P=0.59, P=0.26). There was statistically significant difference between the investiga-tor’s subjective erythema score in week 8 and before treatment on the treatment side(Z=4.24, P<0.01), while no significant difference was showed on the control side(Z=1.73, P=0.08). In week 8, the investigator’s subjective erythema score of the treatment side was lower than that of the control side (Z=3.61, P<0.01). The erythema index of the treatment side was significantly decreased at 5 time points (P<0.01), and the index decreased significantly in week 8 compared with the index before treatment (P<0.01), while the erythema index of the control side was not significantly different at 5 time points. The treatment related adverse events included erythema and edema after treatment and pain during treatment, the severity was mild to moderate, which resolved spontaneously within 1 to 3 days. Nine patients were very satisfied with the treatment, 7 patients were satisfied, and 6 patients considered average. Conclusion: 585 nm Q-switched laser has some effect in the treatment of postinflammatory erythema, and it ensures good tolerance and safety. There was no statistically significant difference between the treatment side and the control side on the improvement of acne inflammatory lesions.

Key words: Acne, Postinflammatory erythema, 585 nm Q-switched laser

CLC Number: 

  • R758.4

Table 1

Comparison of IGA scores on the 585 nm Q-switched laser treatment side and the control side(n=22)"

Groups Treatment side IGA score Control side IGA score Z2 P2
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Prior treatment, n 0 1 15 5 1 0 2 15 4 1 0.54 0.59
Week 8 of treatment, n 0 5 16 1 0 0 8 13 1 0 1.13 0.26
Z1 2.64 2.67
P1 <0.01 <0.01

Table 2

Comparison of investigator's subjective erythema score on the 585 nm Q-switched laser treatment side and the control side(n=22)"

Groups Treatment side Control side Z2 P2
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
Prior treatment,n 0 5 14 3 0 6 14 2 1.41 0.16
Week 8 of treatment,n 1 18 3 0 0 8 13 1 3.61 <0.01
Z1 4.24 1.73
P1 <0.01 0.08

Figure 1

Changes of inflammatory skin lesions and erythema in a patient with acne before and after treatment A and B show the photos of the treatment side before treatment, while C and D show the photos of week 8 of treatment. E and F show photos of the control side before treatment, while G and H show photos of the control side on week 8. A, C, E, G show photos in the ordinary light source while B, D, F, H show photos of the erythema area by VISIA. The inflammatory skin lesions on both sides were improved on week 8, the degree of postinflammatory erythema of the treatment side was significantly improved on week 8 compared with that before treatment, while it showed no significantly improvement on the control side."

Table 3

Erythema index on the 585 nm Q-switched laser treatment side and the control side [M(Min, Max)]"

Groups Prior treatment Week 2 Week 4 Week 6 Week 8
Treatment side 364.0(246.0, 564.0) 356.5(250.0, 477.0) 337.5(247.0, 503.0) 339.5(224.0, 471.0) 327.5(215.0, 464.0)
Control side 344.5(251.0, 549.0) 355.5(244.0, 488.0) 348.5(234.0, 501.0) 342.5(219.0, 497.0) 336.0(233.0, 489.0)
[1] Panchaprateep R, Munavalli G. Low-fluence 585 nm Q-switched Nd:YAG laser: a novel laser treatment for post-acne erythema[J]. Lasers Surg Med, 2015, 47(2):148-155.
doi: 10.1002/lsm.22321 pmid: 25645645
[2] Samuels DV, Rosenthal R, Lin R, et al. Acne vulgaris and risk of depression and anxiety: a meta-analytic review[J]. J Am Acad Dermatol, 2020, 83(2):532-541.
doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2020.02.040
[3] 鞠强. 中国痤疮治疗指南(2019修订版)[J]. 临床皮肤科杂志, 2019, 48(9):583-588.
[4] Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry acne vulgaris: developing drugs for treatment[EB/OL].(2016-10-16) [2021-02-26]. www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/Guidances/UCM071292.pdf.
[5] Yoon HJ, Lee DH, Kim SO, et al. Acne erythema improvement by long-pulsed 595 nm pulsed-dye laser treatment: a pilot study[J]. J Dermatolog Treat, 2008, 19(1):38-44.
doi: 10.1080/09546630701646164
[6] Afra TP, Razmi TM, De D. Topical timolol for postacne erythema[J]. J Am Acad Dermatol, 2020, 84(6):e255-e256.
doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2020.04.144 pmid: 32376427
[7] Min S, Park SY, Yoon JY, et al. Fractional microneedling radiofrequency treatment for acne-related post-inflammatory erythema[J]. Acta Derm Venereol, 2016, 96(1):87-91.
doi: 10.2340/00015555-2164
[8] Chaowattanapanit S, Silpa-Archa N, Kohli I, et al. Postinflammatory hyperpigmentation: a comprehensive overview: treatment options and prevention[J]. J Am Acad Dermatol, 2017, 77(4):607-621.
doi: S0190-9622(17)30129-9 pmid: 28917452
[9] Mathew ML, Karthik R, Mallikarjun M, et al. Intense pulsed light therapy for acne-induced post-inflammatory erythema[J]. Indian Dermatol Online J, 2018, 9(3):159-164.
doi: 10.4103/idoj.IDOJ_306_17 pmid: 29854634
[10] Park KY, Ko EJ, Seo SJ, et al. Comparison of fractional, nonablative, 1 550 nm laser and 595 nm pulsed dye laser for the treatment of facial erythema resulting from acne: a split-face, evaluator-blinded, randomized pilot study[J]. J Cosmet Laser Ther, 2014, 16(3):120-123.
doi: 10.3109/14764172.2013.854626
[11] Li D, Chen B, Wu W J, et al. Experimental study on the vascular thermal response to visible laser pulses[J]. Lasers Med Sci, 2015, 30(1):135-145.
doi: 10.1007/s10103-014-1631-3
[12] Erceg A, de Jong EM, van de Kerkhof PC, et al. The efficacy of pulsed dye laser treatment for inflammatory skin diseases: a systematic review[J]. J Am Acad Dermatol, 2013, 69(4):609-615.
doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2013.03.029
[13] Forbat E, Al-Niaimi F. Nonvascular uses of pulsed dye laser in clinical dermatology[J]. J Cosmet Dermatol, 2019, 18(5):1186-1201.
doi: 10.1111/jocd.v18.5
[14] Seaton ED, Charakida A, Mouser PE, et al. Pulsed-dye laser treatment for inflammatory acne vulgaris: randomised controlled trial[J]. Lancet, 2003, 362(9393):1347-1352.
pmid: 14585635
[15] Lekwuttikarn R, Tempark T, Chatproedprai S, et al. Rando-mized, controlled trial split-faced study of 595 nm pulsed dye laser in the treatment of acne vulgaris and acne erythema in adolescents and early adulthood[J]. Int J Dermatol, 2017, 56(8):884-888.
doi: 10.1111/ijd.13631 pmid: 28447362
[16] Chalermsuwiwattanakan N, Rojhirunsakool S, Kamanamool N, et al. The comparative study of efficacy between 1 064 nm long-pulsed Nd:YAG laser and 595 nm pulsed dye laser for the treatment of acne vulgaris[J]. J Cosmet Dermatol, 2020, 20(7):2108-2115.
doi: 10.1111/jocd.v20.7
[17] Choi YS, Suh HS, Yoon MY, et al. Intense pulsed light vs. pulsed-dye laser in the treatment of facial acne: a randomized split-face trial[J]. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol, 2010, 24(7):773-780.
doi: 10.1111/j.1468-3083.2009.03525.x pmid: 20002654
No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
Copyright © Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), All Rights Reserved.
Powered by Beijing Magtech Co. Ltd