精准强脉冲光与宽谱强脉冲光治疗玫瑰痤疮疗效对比

Comparison of Clinical Efficacy of Delicate Pulsed Light and Optimal Pulse Technology⁃Intense Pulsed Light in the Treatment of Rosacea

目的对比分析精准强脉冲光(DPL)与宽谱强脉冲光(OPT-IPL)治疗玫瑰痤疮的临床疗效。方法选取2021年2月至2022年2月郑州市第七人民医院收治的40例玫瑰痤疮患者作为研究对象,按照不同治疗方法将其分为DPL组(20例)与OPT-IPL组(20例),DPL组患者采用DPL治疗,OPT-IPL组患者采用OPT-IPL治疗,对比观察两组患者皮肤含水量、经皮水分丢失量、红斑情况、临床疗效与不良反应发生情况。结果治疗4周后,DPL组患者皮肤含水量、经皮水分丢失量与OPT-IPL组均无明显差异(t=0283、0581,P=0779、0565),临床红斑评定量表(CEA)评分明显低于OPT-IPL组(t=2566,P=0014);治疗4周后,DPL组患者中显效11例、有效8例、无效1例,与OPT-IPL组患者的显效6例、有效11例、无效3例无明显差异(Z=-1337,P=0181)。治疗期间,DPL组患者不良反应发生率为1500%,明显低于OPT-IPL组患者的不良反应发生率4500%(χ^(2)=4286,P=0038)。结论DPL与OPT-IPL均能有效改善玫瑰痤疮患者的皮肤含水量,降低经皮水分丢失量,修复皮肤屏障功能,但DPL对红斑的改善效果更好,不良反应更少,临床应用价值更高。

Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of delicate pulsed light(DPL)and optimal pulse technol-ogy-intense pulsed light(OPT-IPL)in the treatment of rosacea.Methods 40 patients with rosacea,admitted to The Seventh People’s Hospital of Zhengzhou between February 2021 and February 2022 were enrolled as research subjects,and divided into DPL group(n=20)and OPT-IPL group(n=20)based on the different treatments they received.Patients in the DPL group were treated with DPL,whereas patients in the OPT-IPL group were treated with OPT-IPL.The water content of skin,trans-epidermal water loss,erythema,clinical efficacy,and occurrence of adverse reactions were compared between the two groups.Results After 4 weeks of treatment,there were no significant differences in the water content of skin or trans-epidermal water loss between the DPL group and the OPT-IPL group(t=0283 and 0581,P=0779 and 0565),and the clinical erythema assessment(CEA)score was significantly lower in the DPL group compared with the OPT-IPL group(t=2566,P=0014).After 4 weeks of treatment,the clinical efficacy was evaluated as markedly effective in 11 cases,effective in 8 cases and ineffective in 1 case in the DPL group,which showed no statistically significant difference compared with the OPT-IPL group(Z=-1337,P=0181)-6 cases markedly effective,11 cases effective and 3 cases ineffective.During the course of treatment,the incidence of adverse reactions in the DPL group was 1500%,which was significantly lower than the corresponding 4500%in the OPT-IPL group(χ^(2)=4286,P=0038).Conclusion Both DPL and OPT-IPL can effectively improve the water content of skin,reduce trans-epidermal water loss,and repair the skin barrier function of patients with rosacea.However,DPL does better in improving erythema and fewer adverse reactions,presenting much higher value of clinical application.