强脉冲光ACNE滤光片不同脉冲数治疗寻常痤疮临床观察

Clinical Observation on the Treatment of Acne Vulgaris with Different Pulse Numbers of ACNE Filters Using Intense Plused Light

目的:探讨强脉冲光ACNE滤光片不同脉冲数治疗寻常痤疮的疗效及安全性对比分析。方法:纳入2023年8月-2023年10月在笔者医院医疗美容科门诊就诊的寻常痤疮患者,根据筛选标准最终入选30例。采用自身左右脸对照的试验设计,用随机数字表法将患者两侧面部随机分为三脉冲治疗侧和双脉冲治疗侧,首先使用ACNE滤光片对痤疮部位进行两遍治疗,两侧面部选择相同的能量密度、脉冲延迟及子脉宽,仅脉冲数有差别,三冲侧子脉宽为4 ms-4 ms-4 ms三脉冲,双冲侧子脉宽为4 ms-4 ms双脉冲,之后再用其他滤光片对全面部进行治疗,两侧参数一致。间隔4周治疗1次,共3次。每次治疗后4周评估对比双侧疗效,并在每次治疗中及治疗后记录随访期间不良反应。结果:治疗后三冲侧在痤疮总数目及其疗效指数、炎性痤疮数目及其疗效指数、有效率、显效率等指标评估上均优于双冲侧,差异有统计学意义;在非炎性痤疮数目及其疗效指数上,两侧对比差异无统计学意义。安全性上,双冲侧有1例患者在治疗后额部出现片状结痂、水疱,三冲侧未出现明显不良反应。结论:用强脉冲光ACNE滤光片治疗寻常痤疮,相比于4 ms-4 ms双脉冲,选择4 ms-4 ms-4 ms三脉冲可能是更优的参数。

Objective To investigate the therapeutic efficacy and safety of different pulse numbers of ACNE filters using intense pulsed light(IPL)in the treatment of acne vulgaris.Methods Thirty patients with acne vulgaris who attended the outpatient department of Medical Cosmetology at the author’s hospital between August 2023 and October 2023 were included according to specific screening criteria.A self-controlled experimental design was used,with the left and right sides of each patient’s face randomly assigned to either a triple-pulse treatment side or a double-pulse treatment side using the random number table method.The ACNE filters were applied to the acne areas on both sides of the face during each treatment session,with identical energy density,pulse delay,and sub-pulse width.The only difference between the two sides was the number of pulses.The triple-pulse side was treated with 4 ms-4 ms-4 ms pulses,while the double-pulse side was treated with 4 ms-4 ms pulses.Additional filters were subsequently used to treat the entire face,with uniform parameters on both sides.Treatments were conducted once every 4 weeks for a total of 3 sessions.Treatment efficacy was evaluated and compared between the two sides at 4 weeks after each session,and adverse events were documented during each treatment and follow-up period.Results The triple-pulse treatment side showed significantly better outcomes than the double-pulse side in terms of total acne count,efficacy index,number of inflammatory acne lesions,efficacy index of inflammatory acne,total effective rate,and significant efficacy rate.There was no significant difference between the two sides in the number and efficacy index of non-inflammatory acne.Regarding safety,one patient in the double-pulse treatment group developed patchy scabs and blisters on the forehead after treatment,while no significant adverse events were observed on the triple-pulse treatment side.Conclusion When using IPL with ACNE filters for the treatment of acne vulgaris,the 4 ms-4 ms-4 ms triple-pulse setting may be a more effective parameter compared to the 4 ms-4 ms double-pulse setting.