Comparison of Two Intense Pulsed Light Regimens for Facial Rejuvenation: A Randomized Controlled Study.

Abstract

Intense pulsed light (IPL) is widely used for facial rejuvenation, but comparative clinical evidence for ultra-long-pulse-duration protocols remains limited. In this randomized controlled pilot trial, 27 Chinese participants with mild-to-moderate facial photoaging received three full-face IPL sessions at 4-week intervals using either an 80-ms, higher-fluence regimen (32-50 J/cm2; n = 13) or a 15-ms, lower-fluence regimen (22-30 J/cm2; n = 14). The study compares two complete regimens rather than isolating pulse width. Wrinkle percentile, pore feature count, surface sebum, R2 elasticity, and F4 viscoelasticity were measured at baseline, after each treatment, and at 1- and 3-month follow-up. The primary 3-month ANCOVA adjusted for the outcome baseline value and age, with Holm-Bonferroni correction across five objective endpoints. The nominal between-group difference favored the 80-ms regimen for pore feature count (-264.5 features; 95% CI, -466.9 to -62.1; exact p = 0.0127), but did not remain significant after Holm correction (p = 0.0635); the other objective endpoints were also not significant after correction. Pain was lower, and satisfaction was higher with 80-ms IPL. Adverse events were mild and self-limiting, with no serious adverse events, blistering, edema, pigmentary alteration, or scarring. These exploratory findings support further adequately powered trials.