Does blue light actually work for low-moderate acne?

May 6, 2013 10:36 PM

I am an adult with low-moderate acne in the form of 1-2x weekly zits on my face. I have been intrigued by reading about blue light and in particular BlueMD. Anyone with experience using blue light for non-cystic acne (or any sage words about whether it is hokum)?
posted by stewiethegreat to Health & Fitness (5 answers total)

No personal experience, but this is what UpToDate has to say (it's a primarily physician-based service that considers current evidence for medical stuff - I'd link but you need a subscription). It's all a bit dense and jargony, but it's pretty much the most considered summary you can get. However, it's always tempered by the fact that the studies are smaller and there's not a lot to definitively say!

--

LIGHT/LASER THERAPIES — Clinician-administered light sources are used for the treatment of acne, though well designed clinical trials supporting the benefit of these treatments are limited. Examples of light-based therapies include [15]:

Broad-spectrum continuous-wave visible light sources (blue light, red light)
Intense pulsed light
Laser sources including the potassium titanyl phosphate (KTP) laser, pulsed dye laser (PDL), and infrared lasers
Photodynamic therapy
Photopneumatic technology
Photodynamic therapy ....

Mechanism of action — The mechanisms of action for light-based therapies in the treatment of acne are not completely understood. Proposed theories regarding the mechanisms through which these modalities work include the following:

Blue and red light therapy for acne are thought to work via the absorption of light by porphyrins produced by P. acnes [22,23]. The porphyrins absorb light wavelengths between 400 and 700 nm, and absorb most effectively at wavelengths around 410 nm, which is within the absorption spectrum of blue light. As a result of light exposure, the porphyrins become activated, leading to the production of free oxygen radicals and bacterial death. Red light activates porphyrins less intensely than blue light, but penetrates more deeply into the skin.
Infrared lasers (1320 nm, 1450 nm), radiofrequency devices, and photodynamic therapy are thought to inflict thermal damage to sebaceous glands and decrease sebum production.
Intense pulsed light (400-1200 nm), pulsed dye lasers (585-595 nm), and KTP lasers (532 nm) may function through inhibition of P. acnes and/or damage to the sebaceous glands [24].
Evidence for efficacy — The efficacy of light based therapies for the treatment of acne vulgaris remains under investigation. Clinical trials of light therapies for acne generally have been small and poorly controlled and have yielded inconsistent results.

A systematic review of 25 randomized controlled trials of light-based therapies for acne found the following results [16]:

Multiple treatment sessions with blue light, blue-red light, or infrared radiation were beneficial for the treatment of acne.
Trial results conflicted on the efficacy of green (KTP laser) and yellow (pulsed dye laser) light; treatment resulted in no significant change or only moderate improvement.
Most trials for photodynamic therapy showed a benefit of treatment.
...


Only a few studies have compared light-based treatments with traditional acne therapies [16,24,26]. In a small randomized controlled trial, blue-red light was found to be more effective than 5% benzoyl peroxide for treatment of inflammatory lesions, with a 17.6 percent difference in mean percentage improvement [27]. No difference in treatment efficacy was noted in small randomized controlled trials of blue light therapy versus clindamycin 1% solution (n = 34) [28] or intense pulsed light plus benzoyl peroxide versus benzoyl peroxide alone (n = 30) [29]. In another small randomized trial, improvement in inflammatory lesions with photodynamic therapy was found to be less than that with adapalene 0.1% gel [26].

A panel of experts concluded that based upon the available early data, light-based therapies may be best utilized as an adjunct to medical therapies or for patients who cannot tolerate or decline medical therapy [24]. Additional randomized controlled trials and comparative treatment studies are necessary to clarify the role for laser and other light-based therapies in the treatment of acne vulgaris.
posted by chiquitita at 2:43 AM on May 7, 2013 [2 favorites]

I have used the Tanda Zap (a blue-light treatment) for two months now and it has made a big difference. I have that lovely late-30's hormonal acne and it only takes one or two "zaps" to clean up any blemishes that appear. OTC benzoyl peroxide gel was managing it to the point where I could cover up with makeup most of the time, but with the Zap my skin clears up quickly enough that I can skip the coverup. Sounds like an ad, I know, but I abhor wearing makeup so this has worked very well for me.
posted by sorrygottago at 4:18 AM on May 7, 2013

I, too, had good experience with the Tanda.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 5:17 AM on May 7, 2013

I had 'photodynamic therapy' with Levulan and the results were astonishing, totally worth it. Done in a clinic though, no idea how that compares to the at-home devices. But I would say the answer to 'can light technologies help with spots' is a definitive yes.

acne.org and realself.com can be useful places to mine for reviews on this sort of thing.
posted by kmennie at 6:08 AM on May 7, 2013

Recycling my own old comment, hope it helps:

Sulphur (MSM) supplement as recommended by my dermatologist has been a miracle for me. Per my doctor, you take a small half teaspoon daily for a month and then stop: it will either work for you or not; either way, taking it after a month doesn't add anything. I did it several times over the years (teenage acne, on/off the pill, and moving continents) and every time, it cleared everything up completely. I've always looked for pure sulphur, nothing added. It has no taste whatsoever so you can just put the powder on your tongue and wash down with water.
posted by rada at 7:17 AM on May 7, 2013 [4 favorites]