3.8 Article

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE TREATMENT OF PSORIASIS PLAQUES WITH PUVA BATHS AND NARROW-BAND UVA (311 NM)

Journal

ACTAS DERMO-SIFILIOGRAFICAS
Volume 96, Issue 6, Pages 371-375

Publisher

ELSEVIER ESPANA S I
DOI: 10.1016/S0001-7310(05)73093-3

Keywords

psoriasis; phototherapy; photochemotherapy; PUVA bath; PUVA; NBUVB; UVB-311

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction. Studies carried out to date comparing treatment with PUVA baths and narrow-band UVB (NBUVB) in psoriasis show that better results are obtained with NBUVB. Certain features of the protocols may interfere with the results. Material and methods. Prospective study in a psoriasis unit, with treatment assigned according to availability. Of 167 patients with psoriasis plaques, 32 received PUVA baths (photosensitizer 8-methoxypsoralen at a concentration of 2.6 mg/l) and 135 received NBUVB radiation. A clearing rate of over 70 % was considered a good response. The data were described and compared between the two groups, including multivariate analysis techniques, in order to statistically control the effects of gender, number of sessions necessary for success, minimum phototoxic dose and minimum erythema dose. Results. A good response was obtained in 87.5 % of the cases with PUVA baths (95 % CI: 71.0-96.5) and in 87.4 % of the cases with NBUVB (95% CI: 80.6-92.5). No significant differences were found in the success and abandonment percentages. Among the patients who responded to the treatment, no differences were found in the number of sessions or in the cumulative dose. Gender, cumulative dose or minimum phototoxic dose and minimum erythema dose values were not associated with the response to the treatments either. Conclusions. With psoriasis plaques, similar response percentages can be expected with both treatments, using the proposed protocols. The response is regardless of gender, cumulative dose and minimum phototoxic dose and minimum erythema dose values.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available