Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Dermatol Surg. 2018 Nov;44(11):1411-1420. doi: 10.1097/DSS.0000000000001577.

Efficacy and Safety of a Low-Level Light Therapy for Androgenetic Alopecia: A 24-Week, Randomized, Double-Blind, Self-Comparison, Sham Device-Controlled Trial.

Author information

1
Institute of Biomedical Engineering, College of Medicine and College of Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
2
Department of Dermatology, Cathay General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
3
Statistic and Informatics Department, Providence University, Taichung City, Taiwan.
4
Department of Dermatology, National Taiwan University Hospital and Department of Dermatology, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
5
Research Center for Developmental Biology and Regenerative Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
6
Graduate Institute of Clinical Medicine, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
7
Department of Dermatology, National Taiwan University Hospital Hsin-Chu Branch, Hsinchu, Taiwan.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Previous studies have reported the benefits of low-level/light laser therapy (LLLT) for the promotion of hair regrowth. However, the effectiveness of LLLT for the treatment of androgenetic alopecia (AGA) is still a topic of debate.

OBJECTIVE:

To investigate the efficacy and safety of LLLT on hair regrowth in patients with AGA.

METHODS:

This 24-week, randomized, double-blind, self-comparison, sham device-controlled trial enrolled 100 patients with AGA. All participants were randomly assigned to receive the investigational LLLT on one side of the head and sham light treatment on the contralateral side, 3 times weekly for 30 minutes each, over a 24-week period. Global scalp photography, phototrichogram assessment, the investigator's global assessment (IGA) of hair regrowth, and the subject's assessment of the treatment satisfaction were used for evaluation.

RESULTS:

After 24 weeks of treatment, the LLLT-treated scalp exhibited significantly greater hair coverage than the sham light-treated side (14.2% vs. 11.8%, p < .001). A significantly greater improvement from baseline in hair thickness, hair count, hair coverage, and IGA were also observed in the LLLT-treated side than in the sham light-treated side at the 12- and 24-week visits. No serious adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSION:

The use of LLLT might be an effective, safe, well-tolerated treatment for AGA.

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wolters Kluwer
Loading ...
Support Center