微晶磨削联合药物治疗轻中度痤疮疗效观察

目的探讨微晶磨削联合药物治疗轻中度痤疮的临床疗效和安全性。方法将160例轻中度痤疮患者随机分成三组,其中治疗组70例,采用微晶磨削联合外用0.025%维A酸乳膏和口服甲硝唑-vitB6片;对照1组40例单独采用微晶磨削治疗;对照2组50例外用0.025%维A酸乳膏和口服甲硝唑-vitB6片。8周后观察治疗效果。结果治疗组有效率为100%,对照1组有效率85%,对照2组有效率86%,治疗组有效率明显高于两个对照组,差异分别有统计学意义(P<0.05)。未见明显不良反应。结论微晶磨削联合药物治疗轻中度痤疮较为安全、有效。     

红蓝光联合治疗寻常痤疮临床疗效观察

目的观察欧关娜红蓝光对寻常痤疮的疗效。方法采用波长（633&#177;6）nm红光和（415&#177;5）nm蓝光治疗仪联合治疗98例寻常痤疮患者，每周2次，共4周。观察治疗前、后痤疮皮损改善情况。结果经过8次治疗后，患者皮损明显减轻，以丘疹、脓疱减少明显，粉刺次之，有效率达82．65％，且无明显不良反应。结论欧关娜红蓝光治疗仪联合治疗寻常痤疮，尤其是轻、中度痤疮疗效较好。     

红蓝光联合胶原蛋白敷贴治疗寻常痤疮疗效观察

目的:评价红蓝光照射联合胶原蛋白敷贴治疗寻常痤疮的疗效。方法:1013例寻常痤疮患者随机分为实验组(60例)与对照组(40例),两组均采用红、蓝光交替照射面部,另实验组外敷胶原蛋白敷贴,治疗4周观察两组的疗效。结果:实验组和对照组有效率分别为100%和90%,差异有统计学意义(x~2=6.59,P0.05)。结论:红蓝光交替照射联合胶原敷料敷贴治疗寻常痤疮,疗效明显优于单纯照射红蓝光。     

红蓝光联合阿达帕林治疗轻中度痤疮临床疗效观察

目的探讨红蓝光照射联合0.1%阿达帕林凝胶治疗痤疮的临床疗效和安全性。方法将161例轻、中度痤疮患者分为三组,0.1%阿达帕林凝胶联合红蓝光照射治疗组,仅用红蓝光照射治疗组,仅外用0.1%阿达帕林凝胶治疗组。按皮损治疗前后减少率来判定疗效。结果三组有效率分别为93.55%、80.49%、65.52%。结论红蓝光联合0.1%阿达帕林凝胶治疗面部轻、中度痤疮安全有效。     

LED红蓝光联合胶原蛋白敷贴治疗寻常痤疮疗效观察

痤疮是一种发生在毛囊皮脂腺的慢性皮肤病,其发病机制非常复杂,除雄激素的影响、皮脂分泌旺盛外,毛囊内痤疮丙酸杆菌也是一个重要因素.传统治疗以控制皮脂腺分泌和抑菌为主.局部或全身性使用的药物有异维A酸类药物以及抗生素等[1].但传统药物治疗存在一定的不足[2],药物的使用会对人体产生一系列反应,对皮肤产生一定的刺激使局部皮肤耐受性差,甚至失去屏障作用,同时还会引起细菌的抗药性[3],因而需要寻找更加优化的方法来治疗痤疮.     

消痤丸联合红蓝光治疗寻常痤疮疗效观察

目的观察口服消痤丸联合红蓝光照射治疗寻常痤疮的临床疗效和不良反应。方法 136例患者随机分为三组。A组48例口服消痤丸0.6g,3次/d,4周为一疗程,同时予红蓝光交替照射,其输出波长:红光(630±5)nm,蓝光(405±5)nm,每次20min,每周2次,共8次;B组46例予消痤丸口服0.6g,3次/d,4周为一疗程;C组42例口服消痤丸0.6g,3次/d,同时口服强力霉素片0.1g,2次/d。结果 A组有效率为85.41%,B组为63.04%,C组为76.19%,A组与B组有效率差异有统计学意义(P0.05),A组与C组差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论消痤丸联合红蓝光治疗寻常痤疮疗效显著,且无明显不良反应,值得临床应用。     

红蓝光治疗面部轻中度痤疮疗效观察

目的观察红蓝光联合治疗面部痤疮患者的临床疗效和安全性。方法将108例轻、中度痤疮患者随机分成2组,试验组68例采用红蓝光照射联合外用克林霉素磷酸酯凝胶治疗;对照组40例单独应用克林霉素磷酸酯凝胶治疗。于治疗前及治疗第4周、第8周评价疗效及不良反应。结果治疗4周时试验组痊愈率为11.76%,有效率为61.76%;对照组痊愈率7.5%,有效率42.5%,两组差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);治疗8周时实验组痊愈率为23.53%,有效率为85.29%;对照组痊愈率10%,有效率47.5%,两组差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。实验组与对照组均无明显不良反应。结论应用红蓝光照射治疗轻、中度面部寻常性痤疮安全有效。     

微晶磨削术治疗寻常痤疮疗效观察

我们采用SAZ型秀诺微晶祛疤仪,治疗68例痤疮,效果较好,现报道如下:     

红蓝光联合清痘修复精华液治疗寻常痤疮120例疗效观察

目的观察红蓝光联合清痘修复精华液治疗寻常痤疮的临床疗效。方法将120例寻常痤疮患者随机分为治疗组和对照组各60例,治疗组红蓝光照射每周2次,每晚外用清痘修复精华液。对照组每晚单用清痘修复精华液外涂,两组疗程均为4周。疗程结束后对比观察治疗前、后的临床疗效。结果治疗4周后治疗组有效率为76.67%,对照组有效率为51.67%,两组差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论红蓝光联合清痘修复精华液治疗寻常痤疮安全、有效,值得临床推广应用。     

红蓝光治疗面部寻常性痤疮疗效观察

采用JTN-400型红蓝光治疗仪联合5-ALA治疗寻常性痤疮,每周2次,每次20 min,8次为一疗程,对照组外用0.1%阿达帕林凝胶,于第2周、第4周后观察疗效.治疗组2周后总有效率81.8%,4周后总有效率95.7%,对照组2周后有效率63.5%,4周后有效率81.8%,两组疗效有显著性差异.红蓝光治疗寻常性痤疮安全有效.     

红蓝光联合倒模治疗痤疮疗效评价

目的：评价红蓝光联合倒模治疗轻中度痤疮的疗效和安全性。方法：96例轻中度痤疮患者随机分为实验组（50例）和对照组（46例）。实验组采用红蓝光照射联合倒模治疗;对照组仅用倒模治疗,每周2次,4周后采用痤疮综合分级系统（GAGS）评价疗效,同时观察不良反应。结果：实验组和对照组有效率分别为88.00%和47.83%,差异有统计学意义（P<0.01）,两组均无明显不良反应。结论：红蓝光联合倒模治疗轻中度痤疮安全有效。     

窄谱蓝光治疗寻常痤疮临床疗效观察

目的：观察窄谱蓝光对寻常痤疮的治疗效果。方法：将86例轻、中度寻常痤疮患者分为两组,试验组用窄谱蓝光照射,对照组外用5％硫磺洗剂。采用痤疮综合分级系统（GAGS）评价治疗前、后疗效。结果：试验组和对照组有效率分别为79．55％和 42．85％;GAGS综合分值均较治疗前明显下降（P〈0．01）,但试验组下降更显著。结论：窄谱蓝光治疗轻、中度寻常痤疮疗效好。不良反应小。     

当归苦参丸联合红蓝光和维A酸乳膏治疗中度痤疮疗效评价

目的:评价当归苦参丸联合红蓝光、维A酸乳膏治疗中度痤疮的临床疗效和安全性。方法:将入选的118例中度痤疮患者随机分成2组,治疗组(60例)给予当归苦参丸联合红蓝光、维A酸乳膏治疗,对照组(58例)给予红蓝光联合维A酸乳膏治疗,2组患者疗程均为4周。治疗结束时评价两组患者的临床疗效。结果:治疗组与对照组有效率分别为81.60%和55.17%,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:当归苦参丸联合红蓝光及维A酸乳膏治疗中度痤疮安全有效。     

红蓝光照射联合胶原贴敷料治疗寻常痤疮疗效观察

目的观察红蓝光照射联合胶原贴敷料治疗寻常痤疮疗效和安全性。方法126例寻常痤疮患者随机分成两组,试验组采用红蓝光照射联合胶原贴敷料治疗,对照组采用红蓝光照射治疗。结果治疗4周后试验组和对照组患者有效率分别为93．9％和73．3％,差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01）。结论红蓝光照射联合胶原贴敷料治疗寻常痤疮安全有效。     

红蓝光动力联合复方木尼孜其颗粒及阿达帕林凝胶治疗重度痤疮疗效评价

目的:评价红蓝光动力联合复方木尼孜其颗粒及阿达帕林凝胶治疗重度痤疮的疗效。方法:实验组和对照组均口服复方木尼孜其颗粒和外搽阿达帕林凝胶,实验组加用红蓝光照射。结果:治疗6周后实验组和对照组总有效率分别为92.6%和72.5%,差异有显著性(P0.01)。结论:红蓝光动力联合复方木尼孜其颗粒及阿达帕林凝胶治疗重度痤疮有效。     

An assessment of the efficacy of blue light phototherapy in the treatment of acne vulgaris

Background Acne vulgaris is a common skin condition that affects 8 out of 10 people. It varies from mild to severe, and different treatments target various aspects of the disease. Propionibacterium acnes, one of the culprits involved in the pathogenesis of acne vulgaris, is the main target of all major medical treatments used. Studies conducted in recent years have shown favorable effects within the visible light spectrum for the treatment of acne vulgaris. Objective In this study, we have evaluated the use of intense blue light within the spectral range of 415–425 nm (peak 420 nm) in the treatment of acne vulgaris. Methods Twenty‐one patients with mild to moderate facial acne were treated with blue light phototherapy. All patients were given 14‐min treatment sessions twice a week for 4 weeks. Acne severity was assessed using the Leeds Technique for grading and lesion counts. Disability was assessed using the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). In addition, standard digital and cross‐polarized light photographs were taken and graded by a blinded evaluator. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores and cultures for P. acnes were carried out before starting the treatment and upon completion of the treatment. Results Significant improvement was achieved in the Leeds Acne Grade (P = 0.001). The inflammatory (P = 0.001) and noninflammatory (P = 0.06) lesion counts also improved significantly. A similar change was noted in the DLQI (P = 0.001); a degree of significance was also achieved in the patients’ and the investigators’ VAS scores (P = 0.01 and P = 0.001, respectively). P. acnes colony counts failed to show a significant decrease at the end of the treatment and remained almost constant (P = 0.660). Conclusions We believe that blue light does appear to have some role in the management of acne and may be beneficial for the treatment of a select group of mild to moderate acne patients.     

A new targeted blue light phototherapy for the treatment of acne

BACKGROUND: The effects of blue light phototherapy on inflammatory acne lesions were recently investigated. Many reports have used high-intensity, narrow-band 420 nm UV-free blue light delivery systems. The aim of this study was to evaluate a new blue light system (MultiClear) for targeted blue light phototherapy. METHOD: Ten Japanese patients with acne on the face or back were treated with targeted blue light once or twice a week. Acne severity was graded according to the acne severity score suggested by Allen and Smith (1982). If the acne was prevalent on the back or chest, the acne severity score of Burton et al. (1971) was adopted. The new targeting blue light system is equipped with a flexible optical light guide as a delivery system and the treatment device is placed directly only on the affected area. RESULT: Of the 10 patients, eight had a significantly reduced acne severity score without any side effects. Although two patients discontinued the study because of unsatisfactory results, none of the patients showed any harmful side effects from the targeted blue light phototherapy. CONCLUSION: Targeted blue light phototherapy with MultiClear is effective for the treatment of inflammatory acne lesions. This new irradiation device offers some advantages over previous blue light systems.     

Phototherapy with blue (415 nm) and red (660 nm) light in the treatment of acne vulgaris

In this study we have evaluated the use of blue light (peak at 415 nm) and a mixed blue and red light (peaks at 415 and 660 nm) in the treatment of acne vulgaris. One hundred and seven patients with mild to moderate acne vulgaris were randomized into four treatment groups: blue light, mixed blue and red light, cool white light and 5% benzoyl peroxide cream. Subjects in the phototherapy groups used portable light sources and irradiation was carried out daily for 15 min. Comparative assessment between the three light sources was made in an observer-blinded fashion, but this could not be achieved for the use of benzoyl peroxide. Assessments were performed every 4 weeks. After 12 weeks of active treatment a mean improvement of 76% (95% confidence interval 66-87) in inflammatory lesions was achieved by the combined blue-red light phototherapy; this was significantly superior to that achieved by blue light (at weeks 4 and 8 but not week 12), benzoyl peroxide (at weeks 8 and 12) or white light (at each assessment). The final mean improvement in comedones by using blue-red light was 58% (95% confidence interval 45-71), again better than that achieved by the other active treatments used, although the differences did not reach significant levels. We have found that phototherapy with mixed blue-red light, probably by combining antibacterial and anti-inflammatory action, is an effective means of treating acne vulgaris of mild to moderate severity, with no significant short-term adverse effects.