Cochrane · systematic review · CD003262
Interventions for rosacea
van Zuuren, EJ, Fedorowicz, Z, Carter, B, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2015 · Cochrane Library
SkinAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
144
current version
GRADE rated
87
No studies
56
Included studies
NR
No studies 56 · 38.9%Ungraded 1 · 0.7%Very low 4 · 2.8%Low 23 · 16%Moderate 25 · 17.4%High 35 · 24.3%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Metronidazole compared to placebo for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL ‐ not measured Metronidazole vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Metronidazole vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 252 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Metronidazole vs placebo | RR 1.19 [0.94, 1.51] | 6 studies · 1773 participants | High |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Metronidazole vs placebo | RR 1.98 [1.29, 3.02] | 3 studies · 334 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia Metronidazole vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 7 studies · 602 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Lesion count Metronidazole vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 8 studies · 1964 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Time needed until improvement of the skin lesions Metronidazole vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 514 participants | High |
Duration of remission Metronidazole vs placebo | RR 0.5 [0.25, 0.99] | 1 study · 88 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Azelaic acid compared to placebo for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL ‐ not measured Azelaic acid vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Marked improvement to complete remission on Likert scale Azelaic acid vs placebo | RR 1.46 [1.3, 1.63] | 4 studies · 1179 participants | High |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Azelaic acid vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 1245 participants | High |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Azelaic acid vs placebo | RR 1.32 [1.18, 1.47] | 4 studies · 1179 participants | High |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia Azelaic acid vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 1245 participants | High |
Lesion count Azelaic acid vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 401 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Time needed until improvement of the skin lesions Azelaic acid vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 1245 participants | High |
Duration of remission ‐ not measured Azelaic acid vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Topical ivermectin compared to placebo for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL DLQI and RosaQoL Topical ivermectin vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 1371 participants | High |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Likert scale, good to excellent improvement Topical ivermectin vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 1371 participants | High |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Topical ivermectin vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 1371 participants | High |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Investigator's Global Assessment of clear or almost clear Topical ivermectin vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 1371 participants | High |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia ‐ not measured Topical ivermectin vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Lesion count Topical ivermectin vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 1371 participants | High |
Time needed until improvement of the skin lesions Topical ivermectin vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 1371 participants | High |
Duration of remission ‐ not measured Topical ivermectin vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Topical brimonidine compared to vehicle for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL ‐ not measured Topical brimonidine vs vehicle | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Patient Satisfaction Assessment ‐ grade 2 improvement Topical brimonidine vs vehicle | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 553 participants | High |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Topical brimonidine vs vehicle | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 553 participants | High |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity ‐ not reported Topical brimonidine vs vehicle | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia Clinician Erythema Assessment ‐ grade 2 improvement Topical brimonidine vs vehicle | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 553 participants | High |
Lesion count ‐ not reported Topical brimonidine vs vehicle | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Time needed until improvement of the skin lesions Topical brimonidine vs vehicle | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 553 participants | High |
Duration of remission ‐ not measured Topical brimonidine vs vehicle | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Topical azelaic acid compared to topical metronidazole for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL ‐ not measured Topical azelaic acid vs topical metronidazole | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Topical azelaic acid vs topical metronidazole | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 491 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Topical azelaic acid vs topical metronidazole | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 491 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Topical azelaic acid vs topical metronidazole | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 491 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia Topical azelaic acid vs topical metronidazole | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 491 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Lesion counts Topical azelaic acid vs topical metronidazole | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 491 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Time needed until improvement of the skin lesions Topical azelaic acid vs topical metronidazole | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 491 participants | Ungraded |
Duration of remission ‐ not measured Topical azelaic acid vs topical metronidazole | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Topical ivermectin compared to topical metronidazole for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL DLQI, proportion of participants that reported at end of study that rosacea had no impact on QoL Topical ivermectin vs topical metronidazole | RR 1.11 [1.01, 1.21] | 1 study · 962 participants | High |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Likert scale ‐ good to excellent improvement Topical ivermectin vs topical metronidazole | RR 1.14 [1.07, 1.22] | 1 study · 962 participants | High |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Topical ivermectin vs topical metronidazole | RR 2.28 [0.71, 7.35] | 1 study · 962 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Topical ivermectin vs topical metronidazole | RR 1.13 [1.06, 1.2] | 1 study · 962 participants | High |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia ‐ not measured Topical ivermectin vs topical metronidazole | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Lesion count Topical ivermectin vs topical metronidazole | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 962 participants | High |
Time needed until improvement of the skin lesions Topical ivermectin vs topical metronidazole | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 962 participants | High |
Duration of remission ‐ not measured Topical ivermectin vs topical metronidazole | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% compared to artificial tears for ocular rosacea
Population: Participants with ocular rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL Ocular Surface Disease Index (scale 0 to 100, 100 worst) Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% vs artificial tears | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 37 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity ‐ not measured Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% vs artificial tears | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% vs artificial tears | RR 2.32 [0.1, 53.42] | 1 study · 37 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Schirmer score Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% vs artificial tears | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 37 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia ‐ not measured Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% vs artificial tears | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Lesion count ‐ not measured Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% vs artificial tears | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Time needed until improvement of the skin lesions ‐ not measured Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% vs artificial tears | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Duration of remission ‐ not measured Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% vs artificial tears | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Clindamycin phosphate 1.2% + tretinoin 0.025% gel compared to placebo for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL RosaQoL Clindamycin phosphate 1.2% + tretinoin 0.025% gel vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 83 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity ‐ not measured Clindamycin phosphate 1.2% + tretinoin 0.025% gel vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Clindamycin phosphate 1.2% + tretinoin 0.025% gel vs placebo | RR 2.45 [1.42, 4.23] | 1 study · 83 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity PGA as defined by Wilkin 2004 Clindamycin phosphate 1.2% + tretinoin 0.025% gel vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 83 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia Clindamycin phosphate 1.2% + tretinoin 0.025% gel vs placebo | RR 1.71 [0.7, 4.18] | 1 study · 83 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Lesion count Clindamycin phosphate 1.2% + tretinoin 0.025% gel vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 83 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Time needed until improvement of the skin lesions ‐ not measured Clindamycin phosphate 1.2% + tretinoin 0.025% gel vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Duration of remission ‐ not measured Clindamycin phosphate 1.2% + tretinoin 0.025% gel vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Tetracycline compared to placebo for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL ‐ not measured Tetracycline vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Tetracycline vs placebo | RR 1.48 [0.85, 2.57] | 1 study · 39 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Tetracycline vs placebo | RR 0.95 [0.06, 14.13] | 1 study · 39 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Tetracycline vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 107 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia Tetracycline vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 39 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Lesion count Tetracycline vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 39 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Time needed until improvement of the skin lesions ‐ not measured Tetracycline vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Duration of remission ‐ not measured Tetracycline vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Doxycycline 40 mg compared to placebo for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL ‐ not measured Doxycycline 40 mg vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity ‐ not measured Doxycycline 40 mg vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Doxycycline 40 mg vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 537 participants | High |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Investigator's Global Assessment, two point improvement Doxycycline 40 mg vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 537 participants | High |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia Clinician's Erythema Assessments scale 0 to 4 Doxycycline 40 mg vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 537 participants | High |
Lesion counts Scale from: ‐4.3 to ‐11.8 Doxycycline 40 mg vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 537 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Time needed until improvement of the skin lesions Doxycycline 40 mg vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 537 participants | High |
Duration of remission ‐ not measured Doxycycline 40 mg vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Azithromycin compared to doxycycline 100 mg for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL ‐ not measured Azithromycin vs doxycycline 100 mg | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Azithromycin vs doxycycline 100 mg | RR 0.98 [0.77, 1.25] | 1 study · 67 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Azithromycin vs doxycycline 100 mg | RR 1.62 [0.32, 8.26] | 1 study · 67 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity ‐ not measured Azithromycin vs doxycycline 100 mg | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia ‐ not measured Azithromycin vs doxycycline 100 mg | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Lesion counts Azithromycin vs doxycycline 100 mg | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 67 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Time needed until improvement of the skin lesions ‐ not measured Azithromycin vs doxycycline 100 mg | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Duration of remission Azithromycin vs doxycycline 100 mg | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 67 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole 1% gel compared to doxycycline 100 mg + metronidazole 1% gel for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL ‐ not measured Doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole 1% gel vs doxycycline 100 mg + metronidazole 1% gel | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity ‐ not measured Doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole 1% gel vs doxycycline 100 mg + metronidazole 1% gel | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole 1% gel vs doxycycline 100 mg + metronidazole 1% gel | RR 0.25 [0.11, 0.54] | 1 study · 91 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Reduction in Investigator's Global Assessment Doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole 1% gel vs doxycycline 100 mg + metronidazole 1% gel | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 91 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia Clinician's Erythema Assessment Doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole 1% gel vs doxycycline 100 mg + metronidazole 1% gel | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 91 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Lesion count Doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole 1% gel vs doxycycline 100 mg + metronidazole 1% gel | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 91 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Time needed until improvement of the skin lesions Doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole 1% gel vs doxycycline 100 mg + metronidazole 1% gel | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 91 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Duration of remission ‐ not measured Doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole 1% gel vs doxycycline 100 mg + metronidazole 1% gel | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Doxycycline 40 mg + azelaic acid gel compared to doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole gel for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL ‐ not measured Doxycycline 40 mg + azelaic acid gel vs doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole gel | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Excellent improvement on a 4‐point Likert scale Doxycycline 40 mg + azelaic acid gel vs doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole gel | RR 1.05 [0.79, 1.4] | 1 study · 207 participants | High |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Doxycycline 40 mg + azelaic acid gel vs doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole gel | RR 0.27 [0.06, 1.28] | 1 study · 207 participants | High |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Investigator's Global Assessment of 0, 1 or 2 (clear to mild) Doxycycline 40 mg + azelaic acid gel vs doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole gel | RR 1.08 [0.93, 1.27] | 1 study · 207 participants | High |
Clinician's Erythema Assessment ‐ not measured Doxycycline 40 mg + azelaic acid gel vs doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole gel | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Lesion count Doxycycline 40 mg + azelaic acid gel vs doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole gel | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 207 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Time needed until improvement Doxycycline 40 mg + azelaic acid gel vs doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole gel | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 207 participants | High |
Duration of remission ‐ not measured Doxycycline 40 mg + azelaic acid gel vs doxycycline 40 mg + metronidazole gel | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Minocycline 45 mg compared to minocycline 45 mg + azelaic acid gel for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL ‐ not measured Minocycline 45 mg vs minocycline 45 mg + azelaic acid gel | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity ‐ not measured Minocycline 45 mg vs minocycline 45 mg + azelaic acid gel | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Minocycline 45 mg vs minocycline 45 mg + azelaic acid gel | RR 0.69 [0.39, 1.22] | 1 study · 60 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Mean change in Investigator's Global Assessment (Likert scale 0 to 5). Scale from: 0 to 4. Minocycline 45 mg vs minocycline 45 mg + azelaic acid gel | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 60 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia Mean change in CEA scale (Likert scale 0 to 4). Scale from: 0 to 4. Minocycline 45 mg vs minocycline 45 mg + azelaic acid gel | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 60 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Lesion count Minocycline 45 mg vs minocycline 45 mg + azelaic acid gel | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 60 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Time needed until improvement Minocycline 45 mg vs minocycline 45 mg + azelaic acid gel | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 60 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Duration of remission ‐ not measured Minocycline 45 mg vs minocycline 45 mg + azelaic acid gel | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Topical metronidazole compared to oral (oxy)tetracycline for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL ‐ not measured Topical metronidazole vs oral (oxy)tetracycline | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Topical metronidazole vs oral (oxy)tetracycline | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 182 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Topical metronidazole vs oral (oxy)tetracycline | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 258 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Topical metronidazole vs oral (oxy)tetracycline | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 81 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia Topical metronidazole vs oral (oxy)tetracycline | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 258 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
Lesion count Topical metronidazole vs oral (oxy)tetracycline | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 258 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Time needed until improvement ‐ not measured Topical metronidazole vs oral (oxy)tetracycline | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Duration of remission ‐ not measured Topical metronidazole vs oral (oxy)tetracycline | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Low dose isotretinoin 0.3 mg/kg compared to doxycycline 50‐100 mg for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL ‐ not measured Low dose isotretinoin 0.3 mg/kg vs doxycycline 50‐100 mg | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity1 Good to excellent improvement on 5‐point Likert scale Low dose isotretinoin 0.3 mg/kg vs doxycycline 50‐100 mg | RR 1.23 [1.05, 1.43] | 1 study · 261 participants | High |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Low dose isotretinoin 0.3 mg/kg vs doxycycline 50‐100 mg | RR 1.19 [0.74, 1.92] | 1 study · 299 participants | High |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity1 Complete remission or marked improvement on a 6‐point Likert scale) Low dose isotretinoin 0.3 mg/kg vs doxycycline 50‐100 mg | RR 1.18 [1.03, 1.36] | 1 study · 261 participants | High |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia Improved or healed Low dose isotretinoin 0.3 mg/kg vs doxycycline 50‐100 mg | RR 0.94 [0.83, 1.08] | 1 study · 285 participants | High |
Lesion count1 Low dose isotretinoin 0.3 mg/kg vs doxycycline 50‐100 mg | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 261 participants | High |
Time needed until improvement ‐ not measured Low dose isotretinoin 0.3 mg/kg vs doxycycline 50‐100 mg | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Duration of remission ‐ not measured Low dose isotretinoin 0.3 mg/kg vs doxycycline 50‐100 mg | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pulsed dye laser compared to Nd:YAG laser for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL ‐ not measured Pulsed dye laser vs Nd:YAG laser | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity1 Pulsed dye laser vs Nd:YAG laser | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 14 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Proportion of participants with adverse event1 Pain as assessed by VAS (0 to 10; higher score is worse) Pulsed dye laser vs Nd:YAG laser | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 14 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity ‐ not measured Pulsed dye laser vs Nd:YAG laser | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia1 Spectrophotometer to assess facial redness Pulsed dye laser vs Nd:YAG laser | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 14 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Lesion count ‐ not measured Pulsed dye laser vs Nd:YAG laser | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Time until improvement ‐ not measured Pulsed dye laser vs Nd:YAG laser | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Duration of remission ‐ not measured Pulsed dye laser vs Nd:YAG laser | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pulsed dye laser compared to intense pulsed light therapy for rosacea
Population: Participants with rosacea
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
HRQOL ‐ not measured Pulsed dye laser vs intense pulsed light therapy | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity1 VAS. Scale from: 0 to 10 (0 being a poor and 10 an excellent result) Pulsed dye laser vs intense pulsed light therapy | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 40 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Proportion of participants with adverse event Pain as Pulsed dye laser vs intense pulsed light therapy | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 40 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity ‐ not measured Pulsed dye laser vs intense pulsed light therapy | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia 5‐point Likert scale Pulsed dye laser vs intense pulsed light therapy | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 40 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Lesion count ‐ not measured Pulsed dye laser vs intense pulsed light therapy | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Time until improvement ‐ not measured Pulsed dye laser vs intense pulsed light therapy | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Duration of remission ‐ not measured Pulsed dye laser vs intense pulsed light therapy | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |