Open AccessComparative Study of Efficacy of Glycolic Acid Peel and Intense Pulsed Light in the Treatment of Melasma
Author(s) -
Snehal P. Desale,
Anil Gugle,
Rahul Kote,
Vikrant M. Jadhav
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
mvp journal of medical science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2348-263X
pISSN - 2348-2648
DOI - 10.18311/mvpjms/2015/v2/i1/796
Subject(s) - melasma , intense pulsed light , glycolic acid , medicine , dermatology , photoaging , keratolytic , lactic acid , biology , bacteria , genetics
Background: Melasma, one of the common aesthetically displeasing entities, continues to be a difficult problem to treat. Chemical peeling is one new weapon in the therapeutic armamentarium of melasma. Intense Pulsed Light (IPL) is a noncoherent, broad-spectrum light, ranging from 500 to 1200 nm. Intense Pulsed Light (IPL) treatment is a good option for patients with melasma. Aims and Objective: To compare the efficacy of glycolic acid peel and intense pulsed light in the treatment of melasma. Setting: Outpatient department of Dermatology, Venerology Leprology of a tertiary health care centre with an attached medical college. Material and Methods: 60 patients of melasma were recruited in the study. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups: one group (glycolic acid 50%) and another group (IPL) with 30 patients in each group. All the participants were subjected to undergo pre-peel programme of daily application of sunscreens (day time) and 0.025% retinoic acid at bed time for two weeks in GA peel group. 4 peels were carried out at 2 weekly intervals. Four sessions of IPL were done at 3 weeks interval. MASI scoring and coloured photographs (without reavealing identity) of each patient were taken before each peel and at the end of the follow-up period i.e. 2 weeks after 4 th sitting in GA peel group and 3 weeks after 4 th sitting in IPL group. Side effects, if any, were also recorded. Statistical Analysis Used: SYSTAT version-12. Results: In both the groups there was constant decrease in MASI scores after each sitting as compared to pre-peel scores. However, the comparison of mean MASI scores i.e. both pre-peel and after each peel, between the two groups showed statistically significant difference ( p<0.05 ). Local reactions, such as burning sensation and erythema during the peel were not significant with both the groups. Conclusions: Glycolic Acid (GA) peel (50%) is more efficacious&safe treatment modality in melasma compared to IPL.