SynthesisJournal of cutaneous medicine and surgery
Photodynamic Therapy in Acne Vulgaris: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of cutaneous medicine and surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Light-driven bacterial inactivation using Plumeria rubra extract: a promising natural photosensitizer.International microbiology : the official journal of the Spanish Society for Microbiology · 2026Article
- Photodynamic Therapy in Dermatology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Azure A as a promising candidate for antimicrobial photodynamic therapy of acne-related bacteria.Photochemical & photobiological sciences : Official journal of the European Photochemistry Association and the European Society for Photobiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acne is a multifactorial disorder of the pilosebaceous unit. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is an energy-based treatment shown to be safe in acne vulgaris, although the mechanism of action of PDT in acne is incompletely understood. This review summarizes the clinical features of and treatment efficacy in acne patients treated with PDT. A systematic review of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was conducted. Title, abstract, full-text screening, and data extraction were completed using Covidence. Studies reporting the use of PDT in patients with acne were included while clinical features and treatment responses were extracted. Treatment outcomes were scored as complete response, partial response, and no response. After screening a total of 1122 studies, 82 studies met the inclusion criteria, representing 56 prospective studies, 25 randomized controlled trials, and 1 retrospective study. Results representing 4340 patients with acne (mean age 24.4 years; 52% females) treated with PDT are summarized. Overall, 2154 (50%) participants underwent aminolevulinic acid PDT, 452 (10%) participants underwent methyl aminolevulinate PDT, 28 (<1%) participants underwent daylight PDT, and 1706 (39%) underwent other modalities of PDT. The average follow-up period after study completion was 3 months, ranging from 2 weeks to 13 months. A partial response was observed in treated patients with outcome measures including clinical response, lesion count, pain, recurrence, and patient satisfaction. This systematic review provides preliminary data summarizing the clinical features and treatment efficacy in patients with acne treated with PDT. Our results suggest a partial clinical response when using PDT to manage acne. Future studies should focus on standardizing study protocols and drawing direct comparisons between PDT and other modalities for acne treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.