4.5 Article

Efficacy of the addition of salicylic acid to clindamycin and benzoyl peroxide combination for acne vulgaris

期刊

JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY
卷 39, 期 5, 页码 433-438

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1346-8138.2011.01405.x

关键词

acne vulgaris; benzoyl peroxide; clindamycin; salicylic acid; treatment outcome

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Clindamycin phosphate (CDP), benzoyl peroxide (BPO) and salicylic acid (SA) are known to be effective acne therapy agents depending on their anti-inflammatory and comedolytic properties. The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of the addition of SA treatment to CDP and BPO (SA and CDP + BPO) and compare it with CDP + BPO in patients with mild to moderate facial acne vulgaris. Forty-nine patients were enrolled in a 12 week prospective, single-blind, randomized, comparative clinical study. Efficacy was assessed by lesion counts, global improvement, quality of life index and measurements of skin barrier functions. Local side effects were also evaluated. Both combinations were effective in reducing total lesion (TL), inflammatory lesion (IL) and non-inflammatory lesion (NIL) counts. There were statistically significant differences between treatment groups for reductions in NIL counts beyond 2 weeks, IL counts and TL counts throughout the all study weeks, and global improvement scores evaluated by patients and investigator at the end of the study in favor of SA and CDP + BPO treatment when compared to CDP + BPO treatment. Both combinations significantly decreased stratum corneum hydration, although skin sebum values decreased with SA and CDP + BPO treatment. These combinations were also well tolerated except significantly higher frequency of mild to moderate transient dryness in patients applied SA and CDP + BPO. The addition of SA to CDP + BPO treatment demonstrated significantly better and faster results in terms of reductions in acne lesion counts and well tolerated except for higher frequency of mild to moderate transient dryness.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据