Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Intense Pulsed Light and Pulsed-Dye Laser Therapy in the Management of Rosacea.

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q2 DERMATOLOGY
Qianyu Zhai, Shaohang Cheng, Runying Liu, Jinying Xie, Xiao Han, Zhen Yu
{"title":"Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Intense Pulsed Light and Pulsed-Dye Laser Therapy in the Management of Rosacea.","authors":"Qianyu Zhai, Shaohang Cheng, Runying Liu, Jinying Xie, Xiao Han, Zhen Yu","doi":"10.1111/jocd.16549","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to synthesize and compare the clinical efficacy of intense pulsed light (IPL) and pulsed-dye laser (PDL) therapies for the management of rosacea.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The literatures were searched in the Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to identify relevant studies investigating the use of IPL and PDL for the treatment of rosacea. Screening of the retrieved articles and data extraction were performed as per the pre-established inclusion and exclusion criteria. The primary outcome measures evaluated in this meta-analysis included clearance rates, erythema scores, and pain scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The meta-analysis incorporated data from four studies involving a total of 141 participants. The meta-analysis did not reveal a statistically significant difference between IPL and PDL in the rate of achieving greater than 50% clearance (RR = -0.07, 95% CI: -0.19, 0.05). However, the IPL group demonstrated a significantly higher rate of clearance exceeding 75% compared to the PDL group (RR = -0.13, 95% CI: -0.23, -0.04). The change in erythema index, a key measure of rosacea severity, was similar between the two treatment modalities (SMD = -0.15, 95% CI: -0.55, 0.26). Interestingly, the PDL group reported a notably lower VAS pain score than the IPL group (SMD = 1.54, 95% CI: 0.08, 3.00).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Either PDL or IPL appears to be effective modalities for the management of rosacea. IPL exhibits a slight advantage in achieving a higher rate of substantial (>75%) clearance, while PDL may be preferable for patients with lower tolerance for post-treatment discomfort. However, the existing literature directly comparing these two laser/light-based therapies is limited, warranting further well-designed, large-scale studies to establish the optimal treatment algorithm for this chronic inflammatory skin condition.</p>","PeriodicalId":15546,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jocd.16549","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to synthesize and compare the clinical efficacy of intense pulsed light (IPL) and pulsed-dye laser (PDL) therapies for the management of rosacea.

Methods: The literatures were searched in the Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to identify relevant studies investigating the use of IPL and PDL for the treatment of rosacea. Screening of the retrieved articles and data extraction were performed as per the pre-established inclusion and exclusion criteria. The primary outcome measures evaluated in this meta-analysis included clearance rates, erythema scores, and pain scores.

Results: The meta-analysis incorporated data from four studies involving a total of 141 participants. The meta-analysis did not reveal a statistically significant difference between IPL and PDL in the rate of achieving greater than 50% clearance (RR = -0.07, 95% CI: -0.19, 0.05). However, the IPL group demonstrated a significantly higher rate of clearance exceeding 75% compared to the PDL group (RR = -0.13, 95% CI: -0.23, -0.04). The change in erythema index, a key measure of rosacea severity, was similar between the two treatment modalities (SMD = -0.15, 95% CI: -0.55, 0.26). Interestingly, the PDL group reported a notably lower VAS pain score than the IPL group (SMD = 1.54, 95% CI: 0.08, 3.00).

Conclusion: Either PDL or IPL appears to be effective modalities for the management of rosacea. IPL exhibits a slight advantage in achieving a higher rate of substantial (>75%) clearance, while PDL may be preferable for patients with lower tolerance for post-treatment discomfort. However, the existing literature directly comparing these two laser/light-based therapies is limited, warranting further well-designed, large-scale studies to establish the optimal treatment algorithm for this chronic inflammatory skin condition.

强脉冲光和脉冲染料激光疗法治疗红斑痤疮疗效的元分析》(Meta-Analysis of Efficacy of Intense Pulsed Light and Pulsed-Dye Laser Therapy in the Management of Rosacea)。
目的:本系统综述和荟萃分析的主要目的是综合比较强脉冲光(IPL)和脉冲染料激光(PDL)疗法治疗红斑痤疮的临床疗效:方法:在 Web of Science、PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane Library 数据库中进行文献检索,以确定使用 IPL 和 PDL 治疗红斑痤疮的相关研究。按照预先确定的纳入和排除标准对检索到的文章进行了筛选和数据提取。荟萃分析评估的主要结果包括清除率、红斑评分和疼痛评分:荟萃分析纳入了四项研究的数据,共涉及 141 名参与者。荟萃分析结果显示,IPL 和 PDL 在达到 50% 以上清除率方面没有显著的统计学差异(RR = -0.07,95% CI:-0.19,0.05)。不过,与 PDL 组相比,IPL 组的清除率明显高于 PDL 组(RR = -0.13,95% CI:-0.23,-0.04)。红斑指数是衡量红斑痤疮严重程度的关键指标,两种治疗方法的红斑指数变化相似(SMD = -0.15,95% CI:-0.55,0.26)。有趣的是,PDL 组的 VAS 疼痛评分明显低于 IPL 组(SMD = 1.54,95% CI:0.08,3.00):结论:PDL 或 IPL 似乎都是治疗红斑痤疮的有效方法。IPL在实现更高的实质性清除率(>75%)方面略胜一筹,而PDL可能更适合对治疗后不适耐受性较低的患者。不过,直接比较这两种激光/光疗法的现有文献还很有限,因此需要进一步开展精心设计的大规模研究,以确定这种慢性炎症性皮肤病的最佳治疗方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
13.00%
发文量
818
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology publishes high quality, peer-reviewed articles on all aspects of cosmetic dermatology with the aim to foster the highest standards of patient care in cosmetic dermatology. Published quarterly, the Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology facilitates continuing professional development and provides a forum for the exchange of scientific research and innovative techniques. The scope of coverage includes, but will not be limited to: healthy skin; skin maintenance; ageing skin; photodamage and photoprotection; rejuvenation; biochemistry, endocrinology and neuroimmunology of healthy skin; imaging; skin measurement; quality of life; skin types; sensitive skin; rosacea and acne; sebum; sweat; fat; phlebology; hair conservation, restoration and removal; nails and nail surgery; pigment; psychological and medicolegal issues; retinoids; cosmetic chemistry; dermopharmacy; cosmeceuticals; toiletries; striae; cellulite; cosmetic dermatological surgery; blepharoplasty; liposuction; surgical complications; botulinum; fillers, peels and dermabrasion; local and tumescent anaesthesia; electrosurgery; lasers, including laser physics, laser research and safety, vascular lasers, pigment lasers, hair removal lasers, tattoo removal lasers, resurfacing lasers, dermal remodelling lasers and laser complications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信