LAUSR

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.