Standard management options for rosacea: The 2019 update by the National Rosacea Society Expert Committee

Thiboutot, Diane; Anderson, R. Rox; Cook‐Bolden, Fran; Draelos, Zoe Diana; Gallo, Richard L.; Granstein, Richard D.; Kang, Sewon; Macsai, Marian S.; Gold, Linda Stein; Tan, Jerry

doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2020.01.077

Cited by 113 publications

(162 citation statements)

References 86 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

158

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, preserving and restoring the natural skin barrier using specifically developed adjuvant skin care, in addition to the pharmacologically active treatment of this chronic disease, are important. 3 As such, these results concerning M89 are encouraging for its use either alone or as an adjuvant daily skin care to topical medication in patients with persistent centrofacial erythema of rosacea with no more than 3 papules and pustules.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…A statistically significant improvement of certain clinical signs and symptoms with M89 was observed as early as 15 days for erythema (Day 0: 5.8±2. 3 A statistically significant (P<0.0001) increase from Day 0 was observed for skin hydration as early as 15 days of use of M89 increasing until Day 30 using the corneometer. Conversely, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.001) with the standard skin care after 30 days of use, only.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…Fixed centrofacial erythema is a characteristic pattern, flushing, papules, pustules and telangiectasia may also be observed. [1][2][3] Its course is irregular, with periods of flares and remission. [4][5][6] Rosacea often remains undiagnosed and inadequately managed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Split-Face Study Assessing the Clinical Benefit, Tolerability and Subject Satisfaction of a Dermocosmetic in Subjects with Rosacea Associated with Erythema and Sensitive Skin

Berardesca¹,

Bonfigli²,

Cribier³

et al. 2020

CCID

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of M89 in patients with rosacea associated with erythema and sensitive skin. Methods: Intra-individual study in a split-face design comparing after 30 days M89 twice daily and usual skin care in 20 adult subjects with rosacea and sensitive skin. M89 contains 89% Vichy volcanic mineralizing water (VVMW) and 0.4% hyaluronic acid. It is hypoallergenic and contains no perfume and this convenes in rosacea. Contained minerals reinforce the natural defences of the skin in restoring the natural skin barrier, stimulating antioxidant activity and reducing inflammation, commonly observed in subjects with rosacea. Clinical evaluations included assessment of erythema, desquamation, papules and pustules, skin tightness, dryness, burning sensation, itching, stinging and stinging test as well as local tolerability. Instrumental evaluations included skin hydration and TEWL. Subject satisfaction was assessed at Days 15 and 30. Demodex density was assessed at Day 30. Results: A significant superiority of M89 over the standard skin care was observed for erythema, skin tightness and dryness (all P≤0.05) as early as Day 15, the skin stinging test was significantly in favour of M89 (P<0.05 at Day 15 and P<0.01 at Day 30) and for skin hydration (P<0.0001) at Day 15 and 30 with no difference in mean Demodex density between M89 and usual skin care after 30 days. Tolerance was excellent and subject satisfaction very high. Conclusion: Study results concerning M89 are encouraging for its use either alone or as an adjuvant daily skin care to topical medication in patients with persistent centrofacial erythema of rosacea with no more than 3 papules and pustules.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Split-Face Study Assessing the Clinical Benefit, Tolerability and Subject Satisfaction of a Dermocosmetic in Subjects with Rosacea Associated with Erythema and Sensitive Skin

Berardesca¹,

Bonfigli²,

Cribier³

et al. 2020

CCID

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Revised diagnostic criteria have recently been proposed, abandoning the previously used subtyping approach, favoring a phenotyping classification, in order to provide greater accuracy in diagnosis, to facilitate treatment, and to improve patient care 1 . Therefore, a persistent centrofacial erythema and phymatous changes represent diagnostic criteria for cutaneous rosacea 2 . Facial erythema may appear as an early symptom of rosacea and is often underdiagnosed 3 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy and safety results of micellar water, cream and serum for rosacea in comparison to a control group

Guertler

Jøntvedt

Clanner‐Engelshofen

et al. 2020

J of Cosmetic Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Rosacea is a common inflammatory skin disorder with centrofacial erythema, flushing, telangiectasia, papules/pustules, and possible ocular or phymatous manifestation. Patients’ skin is particularly sensitive to chemical and physical stimuli leading to burning, stinging, dryness, and skin tightness. Objective Dermatological evaluation of the efficacy and safety of skin care products designed for centrofacial erythema in rosacea patients, in comparison with a control group using objective measurements. Rosacea symptoms (itching, tension, warmth, burning, dryness) and quality of life were examined. Methods Sixty Caucasians with centrofacial erythema were enrolled in an 8‐week prospective study, fifty of them exclusively using the study products (micellar water, cream, and serum) with ten participants randomly assigned to a control group. Patients were evaluated at baseline (V0), at 4 weeks (V1), and at 8 weeks (V2). Three‐dimensional objective measurements (VECTRA®) as well as standardized questionnaires were used. Results Results were compared with the control group. A significant reduction of 16% in skin redness as indicated by VECTRA® analysis was seen in the intervention group comparing V0‐V2. Furthermore, rosacea‐associated symptoms diminished by 57.1%, while life quality of affected patients within the intervention group improved by 54.5% comparing V0‐V2, respectively. Conclusions A skin care regime suitable for sensitive and redness‐prone skin led to an enhanced clinical appearance, to a decrease of associated symptoms in rosacea patients, and to an improved life quality.

show abstract

“…3,4 Management of rosacea is varying, including appropriate skin care and lifestyle management, as well as topical and oral therapies. 5,6 Most treatments are generally effective at inhibiting the inflammatory pathways involved in rosacea, 6 thereby promoting the mitigation of papules and pustules. However, the erythema is hard to completely clear by traditional treatments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Willingness-to-Pay and Benefit–Cost Analysis of IPL for Rosacea Treatment: A Cross-Sectional Study in China

Deng¹,

Zhang²,

Deng³

et al. 2020

PPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Intense pulsed light (IPL), as a therapeutic approach for rosacea, had advantage in removing erythema and telangiectasia and was gradually accepted by rosacea patients, but there have been few studies on economic evaluation of this therapy. Purpose: This study aimed to detect willingness-to-pay (WTP) of IPL treatment for rosacea and to conduct a benefit-cost analysis (BCA) among the Chinese population, so as to provide an economic reference for doctors to make treatment decisions. Materials and Methods: An observational, cross-sectional study assessed respondent's demographic characteristics and willingness-to-pay (WTP) of IPL and rosacea patients' clinical data and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). WTP was obtained by contingent valuation (CV) method. In brief, contrast figures of three cases treated with IPL (Case1, Case2, and Case3 represented the increasing severity of rosacea) were showed and WTP was inquired. The costs were obtained according the market and compared with WTP (benefits) to get a benefit-cost ratio (BCR). Predictors of cost-effective WTP were identified using the multivariable logistic regression model. Results: A total of 303 rosacea patients and 202 controls were included in the study. The average cost of a single IPL treatment for rosacea was USD 208.04 in Changsha, China. The mean WTP for Case 1, Case 2, and Case 3 was USD 201.57, 214.64, and 221.74, respectively. WTP was statistically lower for Case 1 than that for Case 2 or Case 3 (P<0.05). The BCRs were 0.85, 1.03, and 1.06 for Case 1, Case 2, and Case 3, respectively. WTP is significantly associated with household monthly income, previous treatment cost, and DLQI after adjustments for demographic characteristics (P<0.05). Conclusion: IPL is an acceptable treatment for rosacea with moderate to severe erythema. For patients with relatively high income or severely impaired quality of life, IPL is an economically feasible therapy and deserves to be recommended.

show abstract

Standard management options for rosacea: The 2019 update by the National Rosacea Society Expert Committee

Cited by 113 publications

References 86 publications

<p>A Split-Face Study Assessing the Clinical Benefit, Tolerability and Subject Satisfaction of a Dermocosmetic in Subjects with Rosacea Associated with Erythema and Sensitive Skin</p>

<p>A Split-Face Study Assessing the Clinical Benefit, Tolerability and Subject Satisfaction of a Dermocosmetic in Subjects with Rosacea Associated with Erythema and Sensitive Skin</p>

Efficacy and safety results of micellar water, cream and serum for rosacea in comparison to a control group

<p>Willingness-to-Pay and Benefit–Cost Analysis of IPL for Rosacea Treatment: A Cross-Sectional Study in China</p>

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About