Treatment of acne vulgaris with a pulsed dye laser: A randomized controlled trial

Jeffrey S. Orringer, Sewon Kang, Ted Hamilton, Wendy Schumacher, Soyun Cho, Craig Hammerberg, Gary J. Fisher, Darius J. Karimipour, Timothy M. Johnson, John J. Voorhees

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Context: The high prevalence of acne vulgaris and its significant morbidity underscore the need for convenient, low-risk, and efficacious therapy. Treatment with various lasers has been reported to improve acne. Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of pulsed dye laser therapy in the treatment of acne. Design, Setting, and Patients: Randomized, single-blind, controlled, split-face clinical trial of a volunteer sample of 40 patients aged 13 years or older with facial acne conducted at an academic referral center from August 2002 to September 2003. Intervention: One or 2 nonpurpuric pulsed dye laser treatments to half of the face (fluence of 3 J/cm2), serial blinded clinical assessments (lesion counts), and grading of acne severity using standardized bilateral serial photographs. Main Outcome Measures: Comparison of the changes in lesion counts from baseline to 12 weeks between treated and untreated sides of the face and changes in photographic evidence of acne severity as graded by a panel of dermatologists blinded to treatment assignment. Results: After 12 weeks, using intent-to-treat analysis with last observation carried forward, there were no significant differences between laser-treated and untreated skin for changes in mean papule counts (-4.2 vs -2.2; P=.08), mean pustule counts (0 vs -1.0; P=.12), or mean comedone counts (2.9 vs 1.6; P=.63). Grading of serial photographs confirmed the clinical assessments, showing no significant mean (SE) differences in Leeds scores (range, 1-12) for treated skin (3.98 [0.32] at baseline and 3.94 [0.27] at week 12) compared with untreated skin (3.83 [0.32] at baseline and 3.79 [0.28] at week 12) (P>.99). Conclusions: In this study, the nonpurpuric pulsed dye laser therapy did not result in significant improvement of facial acne. More research is needed before this laser therapy may be recommended as an acne treatment.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2834-2839
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of the American Medical Association
Volume291
Issue number23
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 16 2004
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dye Lasers
Acne Vulgaris
Randomized Controlled Trials
Laser Therapy
Therapeutics
Skin
Lasers
Volunteers
Referral and Consultation
Observation
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Clinical Trials
Morbidity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Orringer, J. S., Kang, S., Hamilton, T., Schumacher, W., Cho, S., Hammerberg, C., ... Voorhees, J. J. (2004). Treatment of acne vulgaris with a pulsed dye laser: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 291(23), 2834-2839. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.291.23.2834

Treatment of acne vulgaris with a pulsed dye laser : A randomized controlled trial. / Orringer, Jeffrey S.; Kang, Sewon; Hamilton, Ted; Schumacher, Wendy; Cho, Soyun; Hammerberg, Craig; Fisher, Gary J.; Karimipour, Darius J.; Johnson, Timothy M.; Voorhees, John J.

In: Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 291, No. 23, 16.06.2004, p. 2834-2839.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Orringer, JS, Kang, S, Hamilton, T, Schumacher, W, Cho, S, Hammerberg, C, Fisher, GJ, Karimipour, DJ, Johnson, TM & Voorhees, JJ 2004, 'Treatment of acne vulgaris with a pulsed dye laser: A randomized controlled trial', Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 291, no. 23, pp. 2834-2839. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.291.23.2834
Orringer, Jeffrey S. ; Kang, Sewon ; Hamilton, Ted ; Schumacher, Wendy ; Cho, Soyun ; Hammerberg, Craig ; Fisher, Gary J. ; Karimipour, Darius J. ; Johnson, Timothy M. ; Voorhees, John J. / Treatment of acne vulgaris with a pulsed dye laser : A randomized controlled trial. In: Journal of the American Medical Association. 2004 ; Vol. 291, No. 23. pp. 2834-2839.
@article{c1efea09b7334bc495cc1c72138e39ab,
title = "Treatment of acne vulgaris with a pulsed dye laser: A randomized controlled trial",
abstract = "Context: The high prevalence of acne vulgaris and its significant morbidity underscore the need for convenient, low-risk, and efficacious therapy. Treatment with various lasers has been reported to improve acne. Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of pulsed dye laser therapy in the treatment of acne. Design, Setting, and Patients: Randomized, single-blind, controlled, split-face clinical trial of a volunteer sample of 40 patients aged 13 years or older with facial acne conducted at an academic referral center from August 2002 to September 2003. Intervention: One or 2 nonpurpuric pulsed dye laser treatments to half of the face (fluence of 3 J/cm2), serial blinded clinical assessments (lesion counts), and grading of acne severity using standardized bilateral serial photographs. Main Outcome Measures: Comparison of the changes in lesion counts from baseline to 12 weeks between treated and untreated sides of the face and changes in photographic evidence of acne severity as graded by a panel of dermatologists blinded to treatment assignment. Results: After 12 weeks, using intent-to-treat analysis with last observation carried forward, there were no significant differences between laser-treated and untreated skin for changes in mean papule counts (-4.2 vs -2.2; P=.08), mean pustule counts (0 vs -1.0; P=.12), or mean comedone counts (2.9 vs 1.6; P=.63). Grading of serial photographs confirmed the clinical assessments, showing no significant mean (SE) differences in Leeds scores (range, 1-12) for treated skin (3.98 [0.32] at baseline and 3.94 [0.27] at week 12) compared with untreated skin (3.83 [0.32] at baseline and 3.79 [0.28] at week 12) (P>.99). Conclusions: In this study, the nonpurpuric pulsed dye laser therapy did not result in significant improvement of facial acne. More research is needed before this laser therapy may be recommended as an acne treatment.",
author = "Orringer, {Jeffrey S.} and Sewon Kang and Ted Hamilton and Wendy Schumacher and Soyun Cho and Craig Hammerberg and Fisher, {Gary J.} and Karimipour, {Darius J.} and Johnson, {Timothy M.} and Voorhees, {John J.}",
year = "2004",
month = "6",
day = "16",
doi = "10.1001/jama.291.23.2834",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "291",
pages = "2834--2839",
journal = "JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association",
issn = "0098-7484",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "23",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Treatment of acne vulgaris with a pulsed dye laser

T2 - A randomized controlled trial

AU - Orringer, Jeffrey S.

AU - Kang, Sewon

AU - Hamilton, Ted

AU - Schumacher, Wendy

AU - Cho, Soyun

AU - Hammerberg, Craig

AU - Fisher, Gary J.

AU - Karimipour, Darius J.

AU - Johnson, Timothy M.

AU - Voorhees, John J.

PY - 2004/6/16

Y1 - 2004/6/16

N2 - Context: The high prevalence of acne vulgaris and its significant morbidity underscore the need for convenient, low-risk, and efficacious therapy. Treatment with various lasers has been reported to improve acne. Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of pulsed dye laser therapy in the treatment of acne. Design, Setting, and Patients: Randomized, single-blind, controlled, split-face clinical trial of a volunteer sample of 40 patients aged 13 years or older with facial acne conducted at an academic referral center from August 2002 to September 2003. Intervention: One or 2 nonpurpuric pulsed dye laser treatments to half of the face (fluence of 3 J/cm2), serial blinded clinical assessments (lesion counts), and grading of acne severity using standardized bilateral serial photographs. Main Outcome Measures: Comparison of the changes in lesion counts from baseline to 12 weeks between treated and untreated sides of the face and changes in photographic evidence of acne severity as graded by a panel of dermatologists blinded to treatment assignment. Results: After 12 weeks, using intent-to-treat analysis with last observation carried forward, there were no significant differences between laser-treated and untreated skin for changes in mean papule counts (-4.2 vs -2.2; P=.08), mean pustule counts (0 vs -1.0; P=.12), or mean comedone counts (2.9 vs 1.6; P=.63). Grading of serial photographs confirmed the clinical assessments, showing no significant mean (SE) differences in Leeds scores (range, 1-12) for treated skin (3.98 [0.32] at baseline and 3.94 [0.27] at week 12) compared with untreated skin (3.83 [0.32] at baseline and 3.79 [0.28] at week 12) (P>.99). Conclusions: In this study, the nonpurpuric pulsed dye laser therapy did not result in significant improvement of facial acne. More research is needed before this laser therapy may be recommended as an acne treatment.

AB - Context: The high prevalence of acne vulgaris and its significant morbidity underscore the need for convenient, low-risk, and efficacious therapy. Treatment with various lasers has been reported to improve acne. Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of pulsed dye laser therapy in the treatment of acne. Design, Setting, and Patients: Randomized, single-blind, controlled, split-face clinical trial of a volunteer sample of 40 patients aged 13 years or older with facial acne conducted at an academic referral center from August 2002 to September 2003. Intervention: One or 2 nonpurpuric pulsed dye laser treatments to half of the face (fluence of 3 J/cm2), serial blinded clinical assessments (lesion counts), and grading of acne severity using standardized bilateral serial photographs. Main Outcome Measures: Comparison of the changes in lesion counts from baseline to 12 weeks between treated and untreated sides of the face and changes in photographic evidence of acne severity as graded by a panel of dermatologists blinded to treatment assignment. Results: After 12 weeks, using intent-to-treat analysis with last observation carried forward, there were no significant differences between laser-treated and untreated skin for changes in mean papule counts (-4.2 vs -2.2; P=.08), mean pustule counts (0 vs -1.0; P=.12), or mean comedone counts (2.9 vs 1.6; P=.63). Grading of serial photographs confirmed the clinical assessments, showing no significant mean (SE) differences in Leeds scores (range, 1-12) for treated skin (3.98 [0.32] at baseline and 3.94 [0.27] at week 12) compared with untreated skin (3.83 [0.32] at baseline and 3.79 [0.28] at week 12) (P>.99). Conclusions: In this study, the nonpurpuric pulsed dye laser therapy did not result in significant improvement of facial acne. More research is needed before this laser therapy may be recommended as an acne treatment.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=2942586691&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=2942586691&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/jama.291.23.2834

DO - 10.1001/jama.291.23.2834

M3 - Article

C2 - 15199033

AN - SCOPUS:2942586691

VL - 291

SP - 2834

EP - 2839

JO - JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association

JF - JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association

SN - 0098-7484

IS - 23

ER -