Current clinical evidence is insufficient to support HMME–PDT as the first choice of treatment for young children with port wine birthmarks

Author:

Gao Chao1ORCID,Nguyen Vi1,Hochman Marcelo L.23,Gao Lin4,Chen Elliott H.56,Friedman Harold I.56,Nelson John Stuart7,Tan Wenbin18

Affiliation:

1. Department of Cell Biology and Anatomy, School of Medicine University of South Carolina Columbia South Carolina USA

2. The Facial Surgery Center and the Hemangioma & Malformation Treatment Center Charleston South Carolina USA

3. Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Medical University of South Carolina Charleston South Carolina USA

4. Department of Dermatology XiJing Hospital Xi'an Shaanxi China

5. Division of Plastic Surgery, School of Medicine University of South Carolina Columbia South Carolina USA

6. Division of Plastic Surgery Prisma Health Medical Group Columbia South Carolina USA

7. Departments of Surgery and Biomedical Engineering, Beckman Laser Institute and Medical Clinic University of California, Irvine Irvine California USA

8. Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Engineering and Computing University of South Carolina Columbia South Carolina USA

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundPort wine birthmark (PWB) is a congenital vascular malformation of the skin. Pulsed dye laser (PDL) is the “gold standard” for the treatment of PWB globally. Hematoporphyrin monomethyl ether (HMME or hemoporfin)‐mediated photodynamic therapy (HMME–PDT) has emerged as the first choice for PWB treatment, particularly for young children, in many major hospitals in China during the past several decades.AimTo evaluate whether HMME–PDT is superior to PDL by comparing the clinical efficacies of both modalities.MethodPubMed records were searched for all relevant studies of PWB treatment using PDL (1988−2023) or HMME–PDT (2007−2023). Patient characteristics and clinical efficacies were extracted. Studies with a quartile percentage clearance or similar scale were included. A mean color clearance index (CI) per study was calculated and compared among groups. An overall CI (C0), with data weighted by cohort size, was used to evaluate the final efficacy for each modality.ResultA total of 18 HMME–PDT studies with 3910 patients in China were eligible for inclusion in this analysis. Similarly, 40 PDL studies with 5094 patients from nine different countries were eligible for inclusion in this analysis. Over 58% of patients in the HMME‐PDT studies were minors (<18 years old). A significant portion (21.3%) were young children (<3 years old). Similarly, 33.2% of patients in the PDL studies were minors. A small proportion (9.3%) was young children. The overall clearance rates for PDL were slightly, but not significantly, higher than those for HMME–PDT in cohorts with patients of all ages (C0, 0.54 vs. 0.48, p = 0.733), subpopulations with only minors (C0, 0.54 vs. 0.46, p = 0.714), and young children (C0, 0.67 vs. 0.50, p = 0.081). Regrettably, there was a lack of long‐term data on follow‐up evaluations for efficacy and impact of HMME‐PDT on young children in general, and central nervous system development in particular, because their blood‐brain barriers have a greater permeability as compared to adults.ConclusionPDL shows overall albeit insignificantly higher clearance rates than HMME‐PDT in patients of all ages; particularly statistical significance is nearly achieved in young children. Collectively, current evidence is insufficient to support HMME–PDT as the first choice of treatment of PWBs in young children given: (1) overall inferior efficacy as compared to PDL; (2) risk of off‐target exposure to meningeal vasculature during the procedure; (3) administration of steriods for mitigation of side effects; ‐and (4) lack of long‐term data on the potential impact of HMME on central nervous system development in young children.

Publisher

Wiley

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Letter to the Editor;Lasers in Surgery and Medicine;2024-08-22

2. Letter to the editor;Lasers in Surgery and Medicine;2024-06-06

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3