| PHOTOTHERAPY | ARTICLE
Figure 5 Patient five (A) before and (B) after treatment
Overall improvement criteria:
■ For 7% of subjects 30Ð4 0% ■ For 34% of subjects 50Ð 60% ■ For 25% of subjects 70% ■ For 23% of subjects 80% ■ For 7% of subjects 90% ■ For 4% of subjects 100%. (NB. Two areas of treatment give results far below
30–50% with regard to all other areas ® the sides and the shoulders.) At the end of this study, the authors established a
subjective ranking of the results obtained: ■ Excellent 11% ■ Very good 23% ■ Good 54% ■ Rather disappointing 5Ð 7% ■ No response 3Ð5 %.
Discussion Possible evolution of the treatment of stretch marks using photodynamic therapy LED photodynamic therapy (PDT) has clearly demonstrated its usefulness in improving the clinical efficacy of treatment through complementary photosensitising, which triggers a progressive
photoactivation of certain cells directly influencing the effectiveness of specific treatments. Current research laboratories on new photosensitisers
showed a tendency to rapid development, as evidenced by some recent studies on the use of substances of plant origin that have been identified as being able to maximise their effects under the action of light, such as green tea polyphenols for photorejuvenation, or piperine for its action on melanocytes. In future, a better understanding of fundamental
photobiological processes, the development of other photosensitisers, new protocols of administration and irradiation, and the evolution of LED, will probably lead to further improvement of this already efficient technique. Protocols for the delivery of light and the research on
photosensitisers still lack consistency, which is the main cause for the disparity in cure rates. Comparative studies will reveal the optimal combination in the doseÐ time relation to improve clinical outcomes. A better understanding of light distribution in tissues could help to create a standard of light irradiation. All irradiated areas of the skin need a light source with uniform intensity at the same time. Unfortunately, with small areas covered by the light beams emitted by the generators on the market ® other than (to the authorsÕ
LED photodynamic
therapy has clearly demonstrated its usefulness in improving the clinical efficacy of treatment through complementary photosensitising.
prime-journal.com | March 2012 ❚ 51
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112