Comparison of Efficacy and Willingness to a 5% Gluconolactone‐Based Topical Serum and Intense Pulsed Light in Mild Erythema of Rosacea: A Paired Control Study

• Published in: Journal of cosmetic dermatology Vol. 24; no. 3; pp. e70025 - n/a
• Main Authors: Peng, Yiran, Mao, Mengping, Huang, Ziyang, Zhao, Huimin, Li, Ying, Jian, Dan
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England John Wiley and Sons Inc 01.03.2025
• Subjects: Administration, Cutaneous; Adult; Aged; Erythema - etiology; Erythema - therapy; Face; Female; Gluconates - administration & dosage; Humans; intense pulsed light; Intense Pulsed Light Therapy - methods; Male; Middle Aged; mild erythema; Original; paired control; Patient Satisfaction; rosacea; Rosacea - complications; Rosacea - therapy; Severity of Illness Index; Skin - diagnostic imaging; Skin - drug effects; topical serum; Treatment Outcome; treatment willingness; Young Adult; paired control; treatment willingness; intense pulsed light; rosacea; mild erythema; topical serum
• ISSN: 1473-2130; 1473-2165; 1473-2165
• DOI: 10.1111/jocd.70025

ABSTRACT Introduction Mild erythema is a common affliction of rosacea. Many methods including drugs and phototherapy (e.g., Intense Pulse Light, IPL) have been tried to alleviate symptoms. Topical applications for enhancing moisturization have also been thought to be of some benefit. In this study, the improvement of erythema and skin physiology parameters were assessed after a topical serum (5% gluconolactone‐based serum) usage or a single IPL treatment, and the differences in improvement between the two groups were compared. The treatment willingness of the subjects was also performed. Methods In this study, 200 subjects with mild erythema were enrolled; 100 of them were treated with topical serum (TS) for 30 consecutive days and the other 100 for a single IPL treatment. Facial images, local skin images, and physiological measurements were collected before and after treatment, to assess erythema (CEA), overall facial condition (VAS), and other skin physiology parameters (e.g., pore, skin tone, and sebum). Based on the questionnaire, the treatment willingness and satisfaction of the subjects were collected. Results Improvement on erythema, overall facial condition, and skin physiology parameters were observed in two groups. Both subjective assessments and measurements showed greater efficacy in erythema reduction, overall facial condition improvement, and sebum reduction in the IPL group (p < 0.05). Pores and skin tone improvement were comparable in TS and IPL groups. Similarly, subjects with certain erythema improvement in both groups were satisfied with their choice of treatment, in which possible side effects, cost, and duration of the treatment somewhat influence their treatment decisions. Conclusions Topical serum that focuses on redness reduction and moisturization and IPL can improve erythema and skin physiological indicators. IPL is more capable of improving the overall facial appearance. By fully understanding the patient's facial condition and treatment influence, medical practitioners determine the appropriate treatment. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: ChiCTR2400087665