Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025

Comparison of Efficacy and Willingness to a 5% Gluconolactone-Based Topical Serum and Intense Pulsed Light in Mild Erythema of Rosacea: A Paired Control Study

Peng, Y. and Mao, M. and Huang, Z. and Zhao, H. and Li, Y. and Jian, D.

doi:10.1111/jocd.70025

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Mild erythema is a common affliction of rosacea. Many methods including drugs and phototherapy (e.g., Intense Pulse Light, IPL) have been tried to alleviate symptoms. Topical applications for enhancing moisturization have also been thought to be of some benefit. In this study, the improvement of erythema and skin physiology parameters were assessed after a topical serum (5% gluconolactone-based serum) usage or a single IPL treatment, and the differences in improvement between the two groups were compared. The treatment willingness of the subjects was also performed. METHODS: In this study, 200 subjects with mild erythema were enrolled; 100 of them were treated with topical serum (TS) for 30 consecutive days and the other 100 for a single IPL treatment. Facial images, local skin images, and physiological measurements were collected before and after treatment, to assess erythema (CEA), overall facial condition (VAS), and other skin physiology parameters (e.g., pore, skin tone, and sebum). Based on the questionnaire, the treatment willingness and satisfaction of the subjects were collected. RESULTS: Improvement on erythema, overall facial condition, and skin physiology parameters were observed in two groups. Both subjective assessments and measurements showed greater efficacy in erythema reduction, overall facial condition improvement, and sebum reduction in the IPL group (p < 0.05). Pores and skin tone improvement were comparable in TS and IPL groups. Similarly, subjects with certain erythema improvement in both groups were satisfied with their choice of treatment, in which possible side effects, cost, and duration of the treatment somewhat influence their treatment decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Topical serum that focuses on redness reduction and moisturization and IPL can improve erythema and skin physiological indicators. IPL is more capable of improving the overall facial appearance. By fully understanding the patient’s facial condition and treatment influence, medical practitioners determine the appropriate treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: ChiCTR2400087665.

← Back to publications

Journal of cosmetic dermatology 2025

Comparison of Efficacy and Willingness to a 5% Gluconolactone-Based Topical Serum and Intense Pulsed Light in Mild Erythema of Rosacea: A Paired Control Study

Peng, Y. and Mao, M. and Huang, Z. and Zhao, H. and Li, Y. and Jian, D.

doi:10.1111/jocd.70025

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Mild erythema is a common affliction of rosacea. Many methods including drugs and phototherapy (e.g., Intense Pulse Light, IPL) have been tried to alleviate symptoms. Topical applications for enhancing moisturization have also been thought to be of some benefit. In this study, the improvement of erythema and skin physiology parameters were assessed after a topical serum (5% gluconolactone-based serum) usage or a single IPL treatment, and the differences in improvement between the two groups were compared. The treatment willingness of the subjects was also performed. METHODS: In this study, 200 subjects with mild erythema were enrolled; 100 of them were treated with topical serum (TS) for 30 consecutive days and the other 100 for a single IPL treatment. Facial images, local skin images, and physiological measurements were collected before and after treatment, to assess erythema (CEA), overall facial condition (VAS), and other skin physiology parameters (e.g., pore, skin tone, and sebum). Based on the questionnaire, the treatment willingness and satisfaction of the subjects were collected. RESULTS: Improvement on erythema, overall facial condition, and skin physiology parameters were observed in two groups. Both subjective assessments and measurements showed greater efficacy in erythema reduction, overall facial condition improvement, and sebum reduction in the IPL group (p < 0.05). Pores and skin tone improvement were comparable in TS and IPL groups. Similarly, subjects with certain erythema improvement in both groups were satisfied with their choice of treatment, in which possible side effects, cost, and duration of the treatment somewhat influence their treatment decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Topical serum that focuses on redness reduction and moisturization and IPL can improve erythema and skin physiological indicators. IPL is more capable of improving the overall facial appearance. By fully understanding the patient’s facial condition and treatment influence, medical practitioners determine the appropriate treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: ChiCTR2400087665.

Back to publications

Central South University Xiangya Hospital Li Lab Skin Aging and Hair Regeneration Research Center