George M Martin1. 1. Dr. George Martin Dermatology Associates, Kihei, Maui, Hawaii.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and pain of in-office "painless" aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy aimed at decreasing treatment-associated pain in patients undergoing removal of actinic keratoses. DESIGN: Prospective split-face study comparing short aminolevulinic acid incubation times of 15 minutes followed by extended exposure (60 minutes) of continuous blue light versus conventional aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy. Prospective assessment of pain in patients undergoing in-office "painless" aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy. SETTING: Clinical practice office. PARTICIPANTS: Three patients with actinic keratoses participated in the split-face study and 101 in the pain assessment study. MEASUREMENTS: Evaluations in the split-face study included removal of actinic keratoses, skin temperature, and pain measured on a 10-point visual analog scale. Pain was assessed using the visual analog scale in the pain assessment study. RESULTS: In the split-face study, in-office "painless" aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy resulted in a 52-percent reduction in lesions versus 44 percent for conventional aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy. Maximum pain scores of in-office "painless" aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy were all 0 at each time point, and the average score for conventional aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy was 7. Baseline skin temperatures increased from a baseline of 29 to 32°C to 34 to 35°C by minute 10 of blue light activation on both sides of the face. RESULTS from the pain assessment study indicated no or minimal (scores 0-2) pain in nearly all patients who received in-office "painless" aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy as monotherapy or in combination with 5-fluoruacil or imiquimod used as pretreatments. CONCLUSIONS: In-office "painless" aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy appears to be effective for removing actinic keratoses and is associated with little or no pain in nearly all patients. This procedure should be evaluated in large-scale controlled trials.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and pain of in-office "painless" aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy aimed at decreasing treatment-associated pain in patients undergoing removal of actinic keratoses. DESIGN: Prospective split-face study comparing short aminolevulinic acid incubation times of 15 minutes followed by extended exposure (60 minutes) of continuous blue light versus conventional aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy. Prospective assessment of pain in patients undergoing in-office "painless" aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy. SETTING: Clinical practice office. PARTICIPANTS: Three patients with actinic keratoses participated in the split-face study and 101 in the pain assessment study. MEASUREMENTS: Evaluations in the split-face study included removal of actinic keratoses, skin temperature, and pain measured on a 10-point visual analog scale. Pain was assessed using the visual analog scale in the pain assessment study. RESULTS: In the split-face study, in-office "painless" aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy resulted in a 52-percent reduction in lesions versus 44 percent for conventional aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy. Maximum pain scores of in-office "painless" aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy were all 0 at each time point, and the average score for conventional aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy was 7. Baseline skin temperatures increased from a baseline of 29 to 32°C to 34 to 35°C by minute 10 of blue light activation on both sides of the face. RESULTS from the pain assessment study indicated no or minimal (scores 0-2) pain in nearly all patients who received in-office "painless" aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy as monotherapy or in combination with 5-fluoruacil or imiquimod used as pretreatments. CONCLUSIONS: In-office "painless" aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy appears to be effective for removing actinic keratoses and is associated with little or no pain in nearly all patients. This procedure should be evaluated in large-scale controlled trials.
Authors: Neil Swanson; William Abramovits; Brian Berman; James Kulp; Darrell S Rigel; Sharon Levy Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2010-02-04 Impact factor: 11.527
Authors: David Pariser; Robert Loss; Michael Jarratt; William Abramovits; James Spencer; Roy Geronemus; Philip Bailin; Suzanne Bruce Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2008-08-15 Impact factor: 11.527
Authors: Urvashi Kaw; Muneeb Ilyas; Taylor Bullock; Lisa Rittwage; Margo Riha; Allison Vidimos; Bo Hu; Christine B Warren; Edward V Maytin Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2019-09-13 Impact factor: 11.527