Efficacy of intense-pulsed light therapy with topical benzoyl peroxide 5% versus benzoyl peroxide 5% alone in mild-to-moderate acne vulgaris: A randomized controlled trial

• Main Authors: Fatemeh Mokhtari, Maryam Gholami, Amir Hossein Siadat, Tohid Jafari-Koshki, Gita Faghihi, Mohammad Ali Nilforoushzadeh, Sayed Mohsen Hosseini, Bahareh Abtahi-Naeini
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2017-01-01
• Series: Journal of Research in Pharmacy Practice
• Subjects: Acne; Benzoyl peroxide; intense-pulsed light therapy; trial
• Online Access: http://www.jrpp.net/article.asp?issn=2319-9644;year=2017;volume=6;issue=4;spage=199;epage=205;aulast=Mokhtari

Objective: Acne vulgaris is a disease of pilosebaceous unit with multifactorial pathogenesis and threats patients' social functioning. There is a growing research to find faster, more effective, and easy to use treatments. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of benzoyl peroxide 5% (BP) with and without concomitant intense-pulsed light (IPL) therapy in mild-to-moderate acne vulgaris. Methods: In this controlled trial, 58 eligible patients with mild-to-moderate acne and Fitzpatrick skin phototype III and IV were randomly allocated to two groups. All patients were asked to use a thin layer of BP every night. The IPL therapy was administered at the end of first, 2nd, and 3rd months. Acne Global Severity Scale (AGSS), Acne Severity Index (ASI), and total lesion counting (TLC) along with patient satisfaction were recorded. Patients were also examined 1 month after the final therapeutic visit. Findings: The IPL group showed greater reduction in AGSS (P < 0.001) and TLC (P = 0.005) than the control group. However, the difference in ASI was not significant (P = 0.12). Patients in IPL groups were more satisfied than control group (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Adding IPL to BP can result better response to BP alone. In acne treatment, combination therapy such as IPL and other topical agents should be kept in mind.