A systematic review and meta-analysis indicated that at-home light-emitting diode devices with red and/or blue light may be both safe and effective at treating mild to moderate acne vulgaris.
In the study, published in JAMA Dermatology, investigators from Brigham and Women's Hospital found that compared with control treatments, at-home light-emitting diode (LED) devices demonstrated significant efficacy in reducing acne lesions and improving overall skin appearance, with minimal side effects.
"This systematic review supports the safety and efficacy of at-home or portable red and/or blue LED devices for the treatment of acne vulgaris," wrote study authors Sherry Ershadi, BS, and John S. Barbieri, MD, MBA. "Our findings indicate that at-home LED devices likely are a viable treatment option for patients with mild to moderate acne who are seeking nonpharmacologic management approaches," they continued.
The analysis included six randomized clinical trials with a total of 216 participants aged 12 to 50 years. Blue light devices in the studies operated at wavelengths ranging from 414 to 445 nm, whereas red light devices used wavelengths between 630 and 670 nm. Treatment durations ranged from 2 days to 12 weeks.
The LED devices resulted in greater percent changes in inflammatory lesions (45.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 25.1%–65.5%), noninflammatory lesions (47.7%, 95% CI = 18.0%–77.4%), and Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) scores (45.7%, 95% CI = 29.1%–62.4%) compared with control interventions. Four of the six studies demonstrated a low risk of bias when evaluated using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (version 2.0).
The investigators also noted that combination wavelength treatments may offer enhanced benefits: "With respect to wavelength, it seems that both red and blue LED devices are efficacious, with increased efficacy reported when used in combination. When [previous research] compared blue light with red and blue light in combination, they found that the combination of red and blue light resulted in greater improvement in lesions and acne clearance," they emphasized.
The safety profile of these devices appeared favorable, with no severe adverse reactions reported in any of the studies. The few adverse effects documented were mild, including dryness, erythema, discomfort, or pain during light therapy.
Some studies in the review even suggested LED devices might outperform certain traditional treatments. "While few studies have compared LED devices with topical acne therapies, [one study] found greater rates of IGA improvement and [a separate study] found greater reductions in inflammatory lesions with LED devices compared with benzoyl peroxide," the study authors stated.
The investigators acknowledged limitations in their analysis, including "moderate to high heterogeneity between the studies (such as differences in light source, fluence, and treatment duration), [which] made comparisons difficult." They also noted that the results might not be generalizable to all devices currently available on the market.
Despite the limitations, the investigators concluded that "at-home LED devices, particularly those that combine red and blue light, are efficacious for acne and can likely complement other over-the-counter and prescription treatments."
They recommended additional research to identify optimal treatment parameters. "Additional studies comparing the relative efficacy of different wavelengths, fluences, and treatment protocols are necessary to identify the optimal treatment approach for acne vulgaris with light," the study authors concluded.
Disclosures can be found in the research letter.