新型强脉冲光治疗寻常性痤疮临床观察

目的:观察应用新型强脉冲光治疗寻常性痤疮的疗效和安全性。方法:采用以色列Active OpticalSystems强脉冲光治疗系统(GEM专利技术的光子嫩肤仪)治疗50例寻常性痤疮患者1个疗程,观察和记录临床疗效及不良反应。结果:50例患者,基本痊愈12例(24%),显效28例(56%),总有效率80%。治疗后无皮肤红肿,色素沉着等不良反应。结论:新型强脉冲光治疗寻常性痤疮疗效显著,安全性高。     

强脉冲光治疗面部寻常型痤疮

目的：观察强脉冲光治疗面部寻常型痤疮的疗效.方法：应用光子痤疮治疗仪治疗31例面部寻常型痤疮患者,病情Ⅱ～Ⅲ级（炎性和非炎性皮损总数分别为31～50个和51～100个）,治疗波长415nm,每周2次,治疗4～6周,观察记录临床反应,每周拍摄皮损图像.结果：31例患者总有效率61%,皮脂溢出减少率55.7%.治疗期间,未发现刺激、皮炎等不良反应.结论：强脉冲光（415nm）照射治疗痤疮疗效较好,疗程较短,治疗过程安全,可以作为治疗Ⅱ～Ⅲ级炎性痤疮的有效方法,尤其对于不能耐受内服或外用药物治疗者提供了一种安全有效的治疗方法。     

强脉冲光联合西黄丸治疗中重度痤疮临床疗效观察

目的:观察强脉冲光联合西黄丸治疗中重度痤疮的临床疗效。方法:将64例中重度痤疮患者随机分为治疗组和对照组两组,每组32例,两组患者均采用以色列飞顿激光光子工作站治疗,治疗波长420nm,每周2次,观察并拍照记录临床反应,治疗组加西黄丸口服。观察周期均为4周。结果:两组患者面部炎性和非炎性皮损经治疗后,治疗组有效率93.75%、对照组68.75%,χ2=6.56,P<0.05,差异有统计学意义。结论:采用强脉冲光联合西黄丸治疗中重度痤疮,疗效显著,疗程较短,副作用小,值得临床推广应用。     

强脉冲光治疗面部寻常性痤疮85例疗效观察

目的:观察强脉冲光治疗面部寻常性痤疮及改善痤疮后红斑、色素沉着的临床疗效。方法:采用飞顿二号激光光子工作站420~950nm光子手具治疗炎性痤疮患者,1次/周,4次后评价疗效,然后用540/570~950nm手具继续治疗痤疮后红斑、色素沉着,1次/月,3次后评价疗效。结果:85例患者中炎性痤疮的痊愈率达14.1%,有效率达97.6%。痤疮后红斑、色素沉着的痊愈率达5.9%,有效率达96.5%。结论:强脉冲光治疗面部寻常性痤疮及痤疮后红斑、色素沉着有效、无创,不良反应少,可广泛应用于临床。     

强脉冲光治疗寻常痤疮387例

2002年11月～2004年11月,笔者使用强脉冲光照射治疗寻常痤疮患者387例,取得满意效果,现报道如下。1临床资料和仪器1.1一般资料:患者387例,其中女279例,男108例,年龄15～40岁。根据痤疮轻重程度采用pillsbary分类法将其分为Ⅰ～Ⅳ度[1]。其中Ⅰ度(轻度)132例,Ⅱ度(中度)167例,Ⅲ     

ALA-PDT联合强脉冲光治疗中重度痤疮疗效观察

目的：观察5-氨基酮戊酸光动力联合强脉冲光治疗中重度痤疮的疗效与安全性。方法：选取2017年1月-2020年12月来笔者科室就诊的58例中重度痤疮患者,采用5-氨基酮戊酸光动力联合强脉冲光治疗,2周治疗1次,连续治疗3次。比较治疗前、治疗后2周、8周痤疮GAGS评分、瘢痕ECCA评分以及DLQI评分,观察疗效和安全性。结果：光动力联合强脉冲光治疗3次后,患者痤疮GAGS评分显著下降（P<0.05）,差异有统计学意义;3个月随访有效率达93.10%,治疗后瘢痕ECCA及DLQI评分显著降低（P<0.05）,差异有统计学意义。患者术中出现轻度疼痛,术后出现红斑、干燥紧绷及水肿,经对症处理后3～12 d缓解消退。结论：中重度痤疮采用光动力联合强脉冲光治疗效果显著,患者满意度高,安全性好,值得临床推广应用。     

强脉冲光及微晶磨削治疗面部寻常性痤疮的疗效分析

目的:比较强脉冲光和微晶磨削治疗不同时期面部寻常性痤疮的临床疗效。方法:将90例痤疮患者随机分为两组:A组:48例,采用强脉冲光治疗;B组:42例,采用微晶磨削治疗。治疗时间各组分别为1个疗程,治疗后观察两组的临床疗效。结果:强脉冲光治疗针对轻中度痤疮效果明显,微晶磨削治疗针对重度尤其是脓疱性痤疮及其痤疮后留下的凹陷性瘢痕效果显著,差异有显著统计学意义。结论:不同时期的痤疮采用不同方法治疗可以取得较好的临床疗效。     

强脉冲光联合胶原贴敷料治疗寻常痤疮疗效观察

目的:探讨强脉冲光联合胶原贴敷料治疗寻常痤疮的疗效.方法:选取2019年3月-2019年10月在笔者科室就诊的54例寻常痤疮患者为研究对象,根据随机数字法将患者分为对照组和观察组,每组27例.对照组采用强脉冲光治疗,治疗后予以冰敷;观察组在对照组基础上,治疗后加用胶原贴敷料外敷.比较两组患者治疗3、6周后的疗效,并记录...     

强脉冲光结合氨基乙酰丙酸治疗痤疮的临床观察

目的：观察强脉冲光（intense pulsed light,IPL）结合氨基乙酰丙酸（aminolevulinic acid,ALA）～光动力疗法（photodynamic therapy,PDT）治疗炎症性痤疮的疗效及安全性。方法：选取10名中重度炎症性痤疮患者,左右侧面部随机分为治疗侧（IPL结合ALA—PDT治疗）及对照侧（单纯IPL治疗）,共治疗3次,治疗间隔时间4用。治疗结束后,由医生及受试者进行主观评价;应用非创伤性仪器检测皮肤亮度（1ightness,L值）、皮脂含量及角质层含水量。结果：治疗侧与对照侧皮损消退率分别为74．3％和49．6％,有效率80．0％和50．0％,满意率80％和30％。治疗侧L值显著升高（P〈0．05）,皮脂含量显著减少（P〈0．05）。两种治疗对角质层含水量均无显著影响。副作用包括短暂且可耐受的轻微红肿、发热或局部刺痛感。结论：IPL结合ALA—PDT治疗炎症性痤疮疗效好,副作用小。     

红蓝光与强脉冲光联合治疗痤疮的疗效观察

目的:探讨红蓝光与强脉冲光联合应用治疗痤疮的疗效。方法:青年痤疮患者60例,将其随机分为红蓝光组、强脉冲光组及联合治疗组,行相应治疗并评价其疗效,在治疗期间及治疗后3个月内,对患者进行进行随访并观察不良反应发生情况,治疗后从自我感知、社会与情感功能、痤疮症状三个维度评价其生活质量的变化。结果:在治疗2周和4周后,联合治疗组患者GAGS评分高于其他两组,其差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。在治疗全程及治疗后3个月内,联合治疗组患者不良反应发生率低于其他两组,其差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。在对患者生活质量的研究中,联合治疗组患者在自我感知、社会与情感功能、痤疮症状三个维度皆表现出了更积极的效果,其差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:联合应用红蓝光与强脉冲光治疗痤疮,在保证治疗效果的同时,可以降低不良反应发生率,并提高青年患者生活质量,对痤疮治疗有重要意义。     

蓝紫光和强脉冲光联合治疗痤疮的临床观察

目的探讨应用两种不同光源的光，联合照射治疗痤疮的临床效果。方法采用405～420nm波长的蓝紫光和560～1200nm的强脉冲光，联合照射治疗不同阶段的痤疮：用Clear light光子痤疮治疗仪405～420nm蓝紫光，照射治疗痤疮的炎症脓疱期，照射6次，3天一次，每次15～18min；用560～1200nm强脉冲光，照射治疗痤疮炎症消退后的红色色素期，照射5、6次，3周一次。结果180例痤疮患者用两种不同光源的光，联合照射治疗后，痊愈165例(91．7％)，好转15例(8．3％)，有效率100％；随访2年，痤疮无复发162例(90％)，好转18例(10％)。结论采用405～420nm波长的蓝紫光和560～1200nm的强脉冲光联合光线疗法，照射治疗痤疮，是安全有效的治疗方法。     

红蓝光与强脉冲光治疗痤疮的临床疗效分析

目的:观察红蓝光与强脉冲光联合应用治疗痤疮的疗效。方法:150例痤疮患者,随机分为红蓝光组、强脉冲光组和联合治疗组并观察、评价疗效,且在治疗期间及治疗后3个月,随访并观察不良反应发生情况。结果:治疗5周后,联合治疗组患者GAGS评分和有效率高于其他两组,其差异无统计学意义(P<0.05)。在治疗全程及治疗后3个月内,联合治疗组患者不良反应发生率低于其他两组。结论:红蓝光与强脉冲光联合应用治疗痤疮,在保证治疗效果的同时,可以降低不良反应发生率,对痤疮治疗有重要意义。     

A comparative study of intense pulsed light alone and its combination with photodynamic therapy for the treatment of facial acne in Asian skin

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The reaction to intense pulsed light (IPL) on Asian skin often differs from that on Caucasian skin. The study reported herein evaluated the effect on acne vulgaris of IPL alone and when IPL was combined with photodynamic therapy (PDT) using topical methyl aminolevulinate (MAL) in Asians. STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty Chinese subjects with phototypes IV or V and moderate acne were enrolled for a randomized, half-facial treatment study with IPL alone, IPL with PDT, or as controls. Sixteen percent MAL cream was applied to half of the face 30 minutes before treatment in the PDT group. The IPL was provided by the Ellipse Flex system (Danish Dermatologic Development, Denmark), which emitted wavelengths of 530 to 750 nm. The subjects were treated four times at 3-week intervals. Single passes of double pulses with a 10 milliseconds delay and a pulse duration of 2.5 milliseconds were used. The assessment of inflammatory and non-inflammatory acne lesions by two blinded investigators was based on standardized photographs that were taken before each treatment, and at 4 and 12 weeks after the final treatment. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients completed the study. The mean reduction of the inflammatory lesion count was 53% in the PDT group, 22% in the IPL group, and 72% in the control group at 4 weeks, and 65% in the PDT group, 23% in the IPL group, and 88% in control group at 12 weeks. The mean clearance of non-inflammatory lesions was 52% in the PDT group, 15% in the IPL group, and 14% in the control group at 4 weeks, and 38% in the PDT group and 44% in the IPL group at 12 weeks, when and an increase of 15% was noted in the control group. Most patients experienced a reduction of inflammatory lesions that was not statistically significant on the PDT-treated side (P = 0.06) or the IPL-treated side (P = 0.82) at 12 weeks after treatment. Pretreatment with MAL resulted in a better clearance of inflammatory acne than IPL alone. There were no statistically significant differences between the intervention groups and the control group in the mean reduction of inflammatory lesions. Significant reductions of non-inflammatory lesions were observed in the MAL-PDT group (38%, P = 0.05) and IPL groups (43%, P = 0.00) 12 weeks after treatment. Twenty-five percent of the subjects in the PDT group withdrew because of intolerance to procedure-related discomfort. CONCLUSIONS: MAL-PDT using IPL and MAL in Asians did not lead to significant improvement of moderate inflammatory acne compared with the control group. However, there was a delayed effect on non-inflammatory lesions, with significant reductions in both the PDT and IPL groups. A proportion of patients could not tolerate the discomfort that was related to PDT despite the short MAL incubation.     

540nm强脉冲光联合清热散结胶囊治疗痤疮红斑疗效观察

目的：观察540nm强脉冲光联合清热散结胶囊治疗痤疮红斑的疗效。方法：将90例痤疮红斑患者随机分为治疗组和对照组,两组各45例,均采用540nm强脉冲光治疗,能量15～18J/cm2,脉宽12～15ms,每4周1次,3次为1个疗程。治疗组同时给予口服清热散结胶囊1.65g,3次/d,用药8周。两组均在末次治疗后12周判定疗效。结果：治疗组和对照组的有效率分别为82.22%和64.44%,治疗组疗效优于对照组（P＜0.05）,两组均无明显不良反应。结论：540nm强脉冲光联合清热散结胶囊治疗痤疮红斑安全、有效。     

Hair removal with intense pulsed light

The use of light and laser for hair removal has evolved during the past few years. Laser systems such as the ruby laser (694 nm), alexandrite laser (755 nm), diode laser (810 nm) and neodymium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Nd:YAG) laser (1,064 nm) are commonly used in hair removal. However, permanent hair removal has been difficult to achieve using lasers owing to the long growth/rest cycle of normal human hair follicles. There is still an increasing demand for safer and more efficient hair removal techniques. The latest and most effective choice in the treatment of hair removal is non-coherent intense pulsed light (IPL), which is both efficient and safe for hair removal. A group of 210 patients with skin type III–V were treated for superfluous hair in different areas of the body (face, extremities, axillae, bikini line and back) for three to five sessions at 6-week intervals using IPL. There was a significant hair reduction of about 80% with no side effects and minimal complications. Follow-up was done 6 months after the last session. In conclusion, IPL is very effective and safe for hair removal.     

强脉冲光治疗痤疮、雀斑、脂溢性角化病疗效观察

目的:探讨强脉冲光治疗痤疮、雀斑、脂溢性角化病的临床疗效。方法:对153例患者采用强脉冲光进行治疗,包括55例痤疮、47例雀斑、51例脂溢性角化病。每隔3周治疗一次,1个疗程4次。末次治疗后全面评价疗效。结果:痤疮经4次治疗后约有87.27%的患者获得良好疗效,雀斑和脂溢性角化病4次治疗后分别有97.87%,94.12%的患者病情得到显著改善。医生对于三种疾病的疗效满意率达96.73%,患者的满意率达94.77%。结论:采用强脉冲光治疗痤疮、雀斑和脂溢性角化病其近期疗效较好,并且副作用小。