Photobiomodulation Improved the First Stages of Wound Healing Process After Abdominoplasty: An Experimental, Double-Blinded, Non-randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Photobiomodulation is widely studied for its potential benefits in the wound healing process. Numerous scientific studies have highlighted its effect on various phases of wound repair, but clinical validations are few. This comparative trial aims to evaluate the influence of photobiomodulation on the post-abdominoplasty healing process. METHODS: Seventeen Caucasian women (aged 18-55) who underwent an abdominoplasty were enrolled in this double-blinded, controlled clinical trial. The postoperative scars were divided into two areas; the right side of the scars was treated with ten sessions of photobiomodulation (consisting in three types of wavelengths). The other part of the scars was used as control and did not receive any additional treatment. Clinical assessments of both parts of the scars were scheduled at 1, 6 and 12 months postoperative. RESULTS: Within six months following surgery, significantly improved quality of the scars on the treated side compared with the untreated side was reported by patients and experienced professionals according to Vancouver Scar Scale, Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (p < 0.05) and standardized photographs (p < 0.05). At 1 year of follow-up, patients observed no differences between the treated and untreated sides of the scars. This suggests that photobiomodulation appears to play an early role in the wound healing process, accelerating the first stages of cicatrization. CONCLUSION: This study statistically validates the positive impact of photobiomodulation treatment on the first stages of the postoperative healing process. Carried out on Caucasians participants only, this study should, however, be performed on a more heterogeneous population to definitively confirm these effects on an international population. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: Registro Brasileiro de ensaios clínicos: http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br , Trial RBR-49PK78. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Daily treatment with adapalene gel 0.1% maintains initial improvement of acne vulgaris previously treated with oral lymecycline.

Topical retinoids are often recommended for preventing acne recurrence, but there are relatively few well-controlled maintenance studies published. The objective of the present study was to assess the maintenance effect of adapalene gel 0.1% relative to gel vehicle in subjects successfully treated in a previous 12-week adapalene-lymecycline 300 mg combination therapy study. This was a multicentre, investigator-blind, randomised, controlled study in 19 European centres. A total of 136 subjects with moderate to moderately-severe acne vulgaris who showed at least moderate improvement from baseline when treated with either adapalene plus lymecycline or lymecycline plus gel vehicle in a previous 12 week study were included. Subjects were randomised to receive adapalene gel 0.1% or vehicle once-daily for 12 weeks. Efficacy and safety criteria included maintenance rate, percent reduction in lesion counts (total, inflammatory, non inflammatory), global severity assessment, cutaneous tolerability, and adverse events. Adapalene provided better results relative to gel vehicle for all efficacy assessments. The maintenance rate for total lesions was 84.7% vs. 63.5% (P = 0.0049) with adapalene and the vehicle, respectively. Adapalene was safe and well tolerated in this study. This study demonstrates a clinical benefit of continued treatment with adapalene gel 0.1% as a maintenance therapy for acne.

Is combined oral and topical therapy better than oral therapy alone in patients with moderate to moderately severe acne vulgaris? A comparison of the efficacy and safety of lymecycline plus adapalene gel 0.1%, versus lymecycline plus gel vehicle.

This multicenter, randomized, investigator-blinded study compared the efficacy and tolerability of a combination of lymecycline 300 mg/day orally and adapalene topical gel 0.1% (n = 118) to lymecycline 300 mg/day orally plus vehicle gel (n = 124) in patients with moderate to moderately severe acne vulgaris with both inflammatory and noninflammatory lesions. The primary efficacy end point, total lesion count at end point (last observation carried forward), showed a statistically significant difference in favor of the lymecycline plus adapalene group (P =.0011). The mean decrease in total, inflammatory and noninflammatory lesion counts was significantly greater at end point in the lymecycline plus adapalene group than in the lymecycline plus vehicle group (P <.01). In addition, a significant difference for inflammatory and total acne lesions was seen sooner in the adapalene plus lymecycline group. In total, 75.5% of patients in the lymecycline plus adapalene group were markedly improved, almost clear or clear of their lesions at week 12, compared with 51.8% of those in the lymecycline plus vehicle group (P <.001). Local cutaneous tolerance was generally good in both groups, although more patients receiving the lymecycline plus adapalene combination experienced cutaneous reactions than those receiving lymecycline plus vehicle. There are relatively few studies comparing the efficacy of combined oral and topical therapy with either individual therapy alone. This study clearly demonstrates that lymecycline plus adapalene combination treatment resulted in a significantly greater mean decrease in the number of inflammatory, noninflammatory and total lesions than lymecycline plus vehicle and was well tolerated.

The use of lymecycline in the treatment of moderate to severe acne vulgaris: a comparison of the efficacy and safety of two dosing regimens.

We compared the efficacy and safety of lymecycline 300 mg od vs lymecycline 150 mg bid or placebo in the treatment of moderate to severe acne. 271 patients received either oral lymecycline 300 mg od + placebo od, lymecycline 150 mg bid, or placebo bid, for 12 weeks. Reduction in inflammatory lesion counts at week 12 was the primary efficacy variable (global improvement was a primary efficacy parameter vs placebo) and safety was assessed by adverse events. Lymecycline 300 mg od was non-inferior to lymecycline 150 mg bid at all time points and superior to placebo throughout the study. Drug-related adverse events were similar for all treatment groups. Lymecycline 300 mg od is as effective and safe as lymecycline 150 mg bid in the treatment of moderate to severe acne. This new, once daily formulation could potentially contribute towards improved compliance rates with oral tetracyclines.