无针水光与强脉冲光治疗红斑型玫瑰痤疮的疗效比较
Comparison of the efficacy of non-invasive hydrating and intense pulsed light in the treatment of rosacea erythema
黄薏庄 1邱懿璎 1温又霖 1黄彦华 1谢君1
作者信息
- 1. 武汉大学中南医院皮肤科 湖北 武汉 430071
- 折叠
摘要
目的:比较无针水光导入A型肉毒毒素联合氨甲环酸湿敷与强脉冲光在治疗红斑型玫瑰痤疮的疗效.方法:招募红斑型玫瑰痤疮患者90名,采用简单随机抽样法将其随机分为3组,对照组1为强脉冲光治疗联合氨甲环酸湿敷,对照组2为氨甲环酸湿敷,试验组为无针水光导入A型肉毒毒素联合氨甲环酸湿敷,分别在治疗前和第28 d随访患者;本试验采用CBS®云镜皮肤检测仪测定三组患者面部红色区面积(mm2)、面部红色区浓度(%),临床医师红斑评估量表(CEA)评价患者的红斑改善情况.结果:三组治疗后患者面部红色区面积、面部红色区浓度数值较治疗前有明显差异(P<0.05),试验组的治疗有效率优于对照组1及对照组2(P<0.001).结论:无针水光与强脉冲光相比,治疗红斑型玫瑰痤疮有较好的疗效.
Abstract
Objective:To compare the efficacy of non-invasive hydrating treatment combined with topical application of tranexamic acid and botulinum toxin type A versus intense pulsed light therapy in the treatment of erythematous rosacea.Methods:Ninety patients with erythematous rosacea were recruited and randomly allocated into three groups.The control group 1 received intense pulsed light therapy combined with topical application of tranexamic acid,control group 2 was treated with tranexamic acid alone,and the experimental group underwent non-invasive hydrating treatment with botulinum toxin type A and tranexamic acid.The patients were assessed using the CBS® cloud mirror skin analyzer to determine facial redness area(mm2),redness concentration(％),and clinician's erythe-ma assessment(CEA)scale,before the treatment and on day 28 of follow-up.Results:There were significant differences in facial redness area and redness concentration between the pretreatment and post-treatment periods across all the three groups(P<0.05),with the experimental group demonstrating superior efficacy compared to control group 1 and control group 2(P<0.001).Conclusion:Non-invasive hydrating treatment exhibits a more favorable therapeutic outcome than in-tense pulsed light for the management of erythematous rosacea.
关键词
无针水光/强脉冲光/红斑型玫瑰痤疮/肉毒毒素/氨甲环酸Key words
Non-Invasive Hydrating Treatment/Intense Pulsed Light/Erythematous Rosa-cea/Botulinum Toxin/Tranexamic Acid引用本文复制引用
出版年
2024
NETL
NSTL
万方数据