Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines for Laser-Assisted Drug Delivery
Jessica G Labadie,Sarah A Ibrahim,Brandon Worley,Bianca Y Kang,Uros Rakita,Sarah Rigali,Kenneth A Arndt,Eric Bernstein,Jeremy A Brauer,Sunandana Chandra,Aashish Didwania,Catherine DiGiorgio,Mattias Donelan,Jeffrey S Dover,Hassan Galadari,Roy G Geronemus,Mitchel P Goldman,Merete Haedersdal,George Hruza,Omar A Ibrahimi,Arielle Kauvar,Kristen M Kelly,Andrew C Krakowski,Rachel Miest,Jeffrey S Orringer,David M Ozog,E Victor Ross,Peter R Shumaker,Joseph F Sobanko,Kathleen Suozzi,Mark B Taylor,Joyce M C Teng,Nathan S Uebelhoer,Jill Waibel,Molly Wanner,Ina Ratchev,Rachel E Christensen,Emily Poon,Corinne H Miller,Murad Alam
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamadermatol.2022.3234
2022-10-01
Abstract:Importance: Laser-assisted drug delivery (LADD) is used for various medical and cosmetic applications. However, there is insufficient evidence-based guidance to assist clinicians performing LADD. Objective: To develop recommendations for the safe and effective use of LADD. Evidence review: A systematic literature review of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and MEDLINE was conducted in December 2019 to identify publications reporting research on LADD. A multidisciplinary panel was convened to draft recommendations informed by the systematic review; they were refined through 2 rounds of Delphi survey, 2 consensus meetings, and iterative review by all panelists until unanimous consensus was achieved. Findings: Of the 48 published studies of ablative fractional LADD that met inclusion criteria, 4 were cosmetic studies; 21, oncologic; and 23, medical (not cosmetic/oncologic), and 6 publications of nonablative fractional LADD were included at the request of the expert panel, producing a total of 54 studies. Thirty-four studies (63.0%) were deemed to have low risk of bias, 17 studies (31.5%) had moderate risk, and 3 (5.5%) had serious risk. The key findings that informed the guidelines developed by the expert panel were as follows: LADD is safe in adults and adolescents (≥12 years) with all Fitzpatrick skin types and in patients with immunosuppression; it is an effective treatment for actinic keratosis, cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma in situ, actinic cheilitis, hypertrophic scars, and keloids; it is useful for epidermal and dermal analgesia; drug delivery may be increased through the application of heat, pressure, or occlusion, or by using an aqueous drug solution; laser settings should be selected to ensure that channel diameter is greater than the delivered molecule; antibiotic prophylaxis is not recommended, except with impaired wound healing; antiviral prophylaxis is recommended when treating the face and genitalia; and antifungal prophylaxis is not recommended. The guideline's 15 recommendations address 5 areas of LADD use: (I) indications and contraindications; (II) parameters to report; (III) optimization of drug delivery; (IV) safety considerations; and (V) prophylaxis for bacterial, viral, and fungal infections. Conclusions and relevance: This systematic review and Delphi consensus approach culminated in an evidence-based clinical practice guideline for safe and effective use of LADD in a variety of applications. Future research will further improve our understanding of this novel treatment technique.