KTP激光与新型LED光源用于鲜红斑痣光动力治疗的临床对比研究  

Comparison study of clinical effects of LED and KTP laser for photodynamic therapy of port wine stains

作　　者：王玉芝[1] 黄正[2] 苑凯华[1] 

机构地区：[1]南方医科大学,广州市510515 [2]科罗拉多大学辐射肿瘤系

出　　处：《实用医学杂志》2015年第24期4031-4034,共4页The Journal of Practical Medicine

基　　金：2014年CDA-复旦张江光动力基金研究项目(编号:2014CDA-PDT-21)

摘　　要：目的：分析比较KTP激光和新型LED光源用于鲜红斑痣光动力治疗的临床疗效及安全性。方法：成人鲜红斑痣患者129例,随机分为两组：KTP激光治疗组65例,LED光源治疗组64例。两组患者分别接受KTP激光或LED光源光动力治疗,进行3个月的随访及疗效评估。结果：KTP激光组总有效率为58.46%（38例）;LED治疗组总有效率为62.50%（40例）。两组总有效率比较差别无统计学意义（χ^2=0.220,P〉0.500）。KTP激光组不良反应发生率为36.92%（24例）,LED治疗组为15.63%（10例）,两种疗法不良反应的发生率差异有统计学意义（χ^2=7.536,P〈0.010）,不良反应构成比不同。结论：KTP激光和新型LED对鲜红斑痣光动力治疗均能有效地消除病变颜色,疗效确切。但新型LED较KTP激光并发症少,安全性高,成本低,有望作为新光源进行鲜红斑痣光动力治疗的临床应用。Objective To analyze the efficacy and safety of a new LED light source for photodynamic therapy of port wine stains （PWS）. Methods A total of 129 adult PWS patients were randomly divided into two groups which included： KTP laser treatment （n = 65） and LED treatment （n = 64）. Patients were irradiated by either KTP laser or LED after the administration of photosensitizer HMME. They were followed up for three months and the efficacy were evaluated. Results The total effective rate of KTP group was 58.46% （38 cases） and that of LED group in 62.50% （40 cases）. There was no significant difference between the two groups （χ^2 = 0.220,P 〉 0.500）. Adverse reactions of KTP group was 36.92% （24 cases） and that of LED group only in 15.63%（10 cases）. There was significant difference in adverse reactions between the two treatments （χ^2 = 7.536, P 〈 0.010） ,with a different constituent ratio of adverse reactions. Conclusion Both KTP laser and the new LED can effectively eliminate the lesion color, but the new LED light source demonstrateds a lower rate of complications, lostwer cost, and higher safety compared to the KTP laser. LED is a promising new light source for photodynamic therapy of PWS.

关 键 词：鲜红斑痣 KTP激光 LED 光动力疗法 

分 类 号：R758.51[医药卫生—皮肤病学与性病学]