Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology, Pt. B. D. Sharma University of Health Sciences, Rohtak, India.
J Cosmet Dermatol. 2020 Feb;19(2):393-399. doi: 10.1111/jocd.13168. Epub 2019 Sep 25.
Chemical peels have become a popular modality in the treatment of acne vulgaris (AV). Mandelic acid (MA) is a new emerging peeling agent for AV owing to its antibacterial and anti-inflammatory properties. Hence, it is worthwhile to evaluate the effectiveness and safety profile of this newer agent and to compare it with an older established peeling agent, salicylic acid (SA) in the treatment of AV.
Comparison between therapeutic efficacy and safety of 45% MA peel with 30% SA peel in Indian patients suffering from mild-to-moderate facial AV.
A total of 50 patients suffering from mild-to-moderate AV were randomly divided into two groups, with one receiving 30% SA peels and the other receiving 45% MA peels at an interval of 2 weeks for six sessions. Total duration of the study was 12 weeks. Michaelsson acne scores (MAS) and clinical photographs were used to evaluate the efficacy of therapy objectively. Adverse effects of both the agents were also noted at each visit.
Both agents showed almost equal efficacy in improving mild-to-moderate AV. Salicylic acid was found better in treating noninflammatory lesions, while MA had an upper hand in treating inflammatory lesions. Overall, there was no significant difference between the two peels in improving MAS and percentage decrease in MAS. However, adverse effects were lesser with MA peels.
About 45% MA peel was found to be equally effective as 30% SA peel in mild-to-moderate facial AV. However, safety and tolerability of MA peel were better than SA peel.
化学焕肤已成为治疗寻常痤疮(AV)的一种流行方式。由于具有抗菌和抗炎特性,扁桃酸(MA)成为一种新兴的 AV 焕肤剂。因此,评估这种新型制剂的有效性和安全性,并将其与更成熟的水杨酸(SA)制剂进行比较,是值得的。
比较 45%MA 焕肤与 30%SA 焕肤在印度轻至中度面部 AV 患者中的疗效和安全性。
将 50 例轻至中度 AV 患者随机分为两组,一组接受 30%SA 焕肤,另一组接受 45%MA 焕肤,间隔 2 周,共 6 次。研究总持续时间为 12 周。采用 Michaelsson 痤疮评分(MAS)和临床照片客观评估治疗效果。还在每次就诊时记录两种制剂的不良反应。
两种制剂在改善轻至中度 AV 方面均显示出相当的疗效。SA 对非炎症性皮损的疗效更好,而 MA 在治疗炎症性皮损方面更具优势。总体而言,两种焕肤剂在改善 MAS 和 MAS 百分比下降方面没有显著差异。然而,MA 焕肤的不良反应较少。
45%MA 焕肤在轻至中度面部 AV 中的疗效与 30%SA 焕肤相当。然而,MA 焕肤的安全性和耐受性优于 SA 焕肤。