Daylight PDT as effective as conventional redlight PDT for acne vulgaris: Study
Daylight Photodynamic therapy was at least as effective as conventional redlight Photodynamic therapy for acne vulgaris, according to a recent study published in the journal of Cosmetic Dermatology.
Acne vulgaris is a common chronic skin disease involving blockage and/or inflammation of pilosebaceous units (hair follicles and their accompanying sebaceous gland). Acne can present as noninflammatory lesions, inflammatory lesions, or a mixture of both, affecting mostly the face but also the back and chest. Treatment, based on severity, can involve a variety of topical and systemic agents directed at reducing sebum production, comedone formation, inflammation, and bacterial counts and at normalizing keratinization. Also, Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is considered an effective treatment for acne vulgaris. A significant drawback is pain during illumination. Daylight PDT (DL-PDT) is more tolerable.
A group of researchers conducted a study to assess and compare the efficacy and tolerability of DL-PDT and C-PDT for acne vulgaris through a prospective split-face trial.
Fifteen patients underwent 4 treatment sessions at 3-week intervals. First, 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) was applied to the entire face, after which the face was divided into 2 symmetrical areas: The right side was exposed to sunlight, and the left half was illuminated with red light. Photographs were obtained and evaluated by two dermatologists blinded to the study protocol. The patients reported side effects and downtime.
The Results of the study are:
There was a statistically significant decrease in the number and percent change of inflammatory and non-inflammatory lesions on both sides. Adverse effects were markedly decreased on the DL-PDT side compared to the C-PDT side (p < .01). The average downtime duration was longer for the C-PDT side (p < .001).
Thus, the researchers concluded that DL-PDT was at least as effective as C-PDT with fewer adverse effects and a shorter downtime duration.
Reference:
A split-face clinical trial of conventional red-light photodynamic therapy versus daylight photodynamic therapy for acne vulgaris by Evgenia Slutsky-Bank et al. published in the Clinical Trial.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34333844/
Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.
NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.