Elham Behrangi; Azadeh Goodarzi; Amir Heydarian; Mohammadreza Ghasemi; Zahra Azizian; Parvaneh Hassani; Behrad Dalvand; Nima Hajiha
Abstract
Background: Among different treatments for periorbital hyperpigmentation (POH), both semi-invasive protocols of fractional CO2 laser and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) are favored among clinicians and rarely cause complications; however, the level of patients’ satisfaction seems to differ across these ...
Read More
Background: Among different treatments for periorbital hyperpigmentation (POH), both semi-invasive protocols of fractional CO2 laser and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) are favored among clinicians and rarely cause complications; however, the level of patients’ satisfaction seems to differ across these methods.Methods: This randomized clinical trial was conducted on 100 patients (98 women; 2 men) between 28 to 62 years of age who complained of POH and referred to the Dermatology Clinic of Rasool Akram Medical Complex located in Tehran in 2017. The patients were randomly assigned to two groups receiving fractional CO2 laser (group C) and adding PRP treatments plus laser therapy (group CP). The outcome of both treatment protocols was followed 3 and 6 months after the last treatment by standard photography.Results: The time for swelling after treatment in the C and CP groups was 4.58 ± 0.61 days and 2.94 ± 0.68 days, respectively, which was significantly shorter in group CP (P < 0.001). The mean time for erythema disappearance was also shorter in group CP (5.20 ± 0.76 days vs. 3.40 ± 0.76 days, P < 0.001). Regarding the trend of the change in the ΔE parameter, it fell significantly in both groups within the follow-up period (P < 0.001); however, the mean ΔE was significantly higher in the CP group when compared with the control group (P < 0.001). There were no significant or resistant side effects in either treatment group.Conclusion: Although both therapies are effective and safe, the concurrent use of CO2 laser and PRP can more effectively reduce the severity of POH with a shorter duration of post-treatment swelling and erythema. Hence, this combination is a superior modality for the treatment of POH as compared to laser therapy alone.
Anu George T; Vinutha Rangappa; Jayadev Betkerur
Abstract
Background: Periorbital hyperpigmentation (POH), a common problem of multifactorial etiology, is obvious on the face and can affect patients’ quality of life (QoL). It is essentially a clinical diagnosis, but dermoscopy might aid in further classification of the disease. Also, it might give us ...
Read More
Background: Periorbital hyperpigmentation (POH), a common problem of multifactorial etiology, is obvious on the face and can affect patients’ quality of life (QoL). It is essentially a clinical diagnosis, but dermoscopy might aid in further classification of the disease. Also, it might give us a clue regarding the etiology and help in the treatment, as different types of POH respond to varying treatments. We aimed to assess clinical, dermoscopic patterns and quality of life using the Melasma Quality of Life (MELASQOL) scale in POH and to compare it with controls.Methods: Detailed histories were obtained from 100 patients with POH. The clinical and dermoscopic examination was done, and the obtained results were compared against 100 controls. The MELASQOL scale was used to assess QoL.Results: Family history (P = 0.013), lack of sleep (P = 0.003), stress (P = 0.001), and eye rubbing (P = 0.01) were the probable risk factors. Blotchy pattern (P < 0.0001), speckled pattern (P < 0.0001), and telangiectasia (P = 0.007) were the significant dermoscopic findings. Controls showed pseudoreticular (P < 0.001) and superficial dilated veins (P < 0.0001). Quality of life was affected in 30.6% of patients; it was more affected in grade 4 POH.Conclusion: Dermoscopy will aid in the classification of POH. Blotchy pattern, speckled pattern, and telangiectasia are the typical dermoscopic patterns, more so in higher grades. QoL may be affected in POH. However, MELASQOL is not adequate to assess QoL in POH.
