Skip to content
Review Open access

Post-acne Erythema: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials on the Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Interventions Across Clinical, Instrumental, and Patient-Reported Outcomes

Sep 2026 · Cureus · Vol 18 · 0 citations · 26 references
Medicine

Abstract

Post-acne erythema (PAE) is a persistent acne sequela without an established standard treatment. This systematic review evaluated the comparative efficacy and safety of interventions tested in randomized trials. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from inception through August 1, 2026. Randomized parallel-group and split-face trials reporting erythema outcomes were eligible. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool. Heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis, and available findings were synthesized narratively. Nine trials involving 301 participants contributed 11 pairwise comparisons. Against untreated or blank controls, favorable effects were reported for picosecond alexandrite laser, narrow-spectrum vascular intense pulsed light (IPL), and non-cross-linked hyaluronic acid mesotherapy. A 577-nm semiconductor laser showed interim instrumental benefit, but blinded assessors found no final between-side difference. In active-treatment and add-on comparisons, narrow-spectrum IPL was favored over broad-spectrum IPL, neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd) laser added to low-dose isotretinoin was favored over isotretinoin alone, and 577-nm pro-yellow laser was favored over topical brimonidine. Botulinum toxin type A was favored over broadband light at the earliest assessment only. Fractional laser and pulsed dye laser did not differ significantly, while delicate pulsed light and Q-switched 1064-nm Nd laser showed no sustained difference at the final assessment. Adverse events were mild and transient, although pigmentation and blistering occurred with one broad-spectrum IPL protocol. Five trials had some concerns, and four had high overall risk of bias. Trials suggested potential benefits, but small samples, heterogeneity, short follow-up, and reporting limitations precluded identification of a preferred treatment. Larger, prospectively registered trials using blinded assessment and standardized outcomes are needed.

Read PDF

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.