Background: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) has gradually developed into a promising modality for actinic cheilitis (AC), and many new PDT strategies are emerging. However, comprehensive reviews evaluating the efficacy of PDT strategies for AC are lacking.
Objective: To systematically review the safety and efficacy of PDT strategies for AC.
Methods: A systematic review was conducted using three databases to compare several types of PDT for AC in terms of clinical response (CR), histopathology response (HR), cosmetic result, and adverse events.
Results: A total of 19 studies were included, and 292 subjects were finally enrolled. The complete CR rate of ALA-patch PDT, traditional photodynamic therapy (T-PDT), and daylight photodynamic therapy (DL-PDT) was 80.00% (24/30), 65.14% (114/179), and 76.74% (33/43), respectively. The rate of painless patients was 87.10% (27/31) in DL-PDT, whereas the rate was only 31.25% (15/48) in T-PDT. The rates of moderate and severe local phototoxicity were 47.78% (43/90) in T-PDT, 0.00% (0/23) in DL-PDT, and 21.05% (4/19) in ALA-patch PDT.
Conclusion: Published literature suggests that ALA-patch PDT seem to achieve high complete CR rate. Besides, DL-PDT might be a well-tolerated therapy compared with T-PDT and ALA-patch PDT. However, these assumptions are made based on very limited data. It is necessary to conduct a long-term larger sample randomized controlled trial to further evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of various PDT schemes for AC.
Keywords: Actinic cheilitis; Photodynamic therapy; Review; Treatment.
Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier B.V.