Comparative analysis of recurrence rates: Day-light versus red-light photodynamic therapy in the treatment of actinic keratosis during a five-year follow-up

IF 3.1 3区医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY

Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy Pub Date : 2025-03-19 DOI:10.1016/j.pdpdt.2025.104562

Peiru Wang, Yutong Yang, Yan Zhao, Yajin Cao, Zhongxia Zhou, Guolong Zhang, Linglin Zhang, Xiuli Wang

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Significance

Day-light photodynamic therapy (DL-PDT) was proved to be effective, better tolerated and nearly painless compared with red-light photodynamic therapy (RL-PDT) in actinic keratosis (AK) patients in China. But no study has compared the recurrence rates of these two methods.

Approach

A prospective cohort study was conducted to compare the recurrence rate of DL-PDT and RL-PDT during a five-year follow-up.

Results

A total of 55 patients were finally included, with 24 patients in the DL-PDT group and 31 patients in the RL-PDT group. The overall recurrence rate in the DL-PDT group was significantly higher than that in the RL-PDT group (62.50 % vs. 9.68 %, P<0.05).

Conclusions

The recurrence rate of DL-PDT was significantly higher than that of RL-PDT.

查看原文本刊更多论文

复发率的比较分析：日光与红光光动力疗法治疗光化性角化病的5年随访。

意义：在中国，与红光光动力治疗（RL-PDT）相比，日光光动力治疗（DL-PDT）在光化性角化病（AK）患者中被证明是有效的，耐受性更好，几乎无痛。但没有研究比较过这两种方法的复发率。方法：进行前瞻性队列研究，比较DL-PDT和RL-PDT在五年随访期间的复发率。结果：最终纳入55例患者，DL-PDT组24例，RL-PDT组31例。DL-PDT组的总复发率明显高于RL-PDT组（62.50% vs. 9.68%）。结论：DL-PDT的复发率明显高于RL-PDT。

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

Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy ONCOLOGY-

CiteScore

5.80

自引率

24.20%

发文量

509

审稿时长

50 days

期刊介绍： Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy is an international journal for the dissemination of scientific knowledge and clinical developments of Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy in all medical specialties. The journal publishes original articles, review articles, case presentations, "how-to-do-it" articles, Letters to the Editor, short communications and relevant images with short descriptions. All submitted material is subject to a strict peer-review process.