Real-Time Video Microscopy of In Vitro Demodex Death by Intense Pulsed Light.

Objective: To directly observe the in vitro real-time effects of intense pulsed light (IPL) on a Demodex mite extracted from an eyelash of a patient with ocular rosacea. Background: Demodex is a risk factor in the pathogenesis of oculofacial rosacea, meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD), and dry eye disease (DED). Recent studies suggested IPL to control or eradicate Demodex organisms in the periocular area. Despite encouraging reports, the direct effect of IPL on Demodex is not well understood. Methods: An eyelash infested with Demodex was epilated from a 62-year-old female patient with oculofacial rosacea. Following isolation and adherence of a mite onto a microscope slide, real-time video microscopy was used to capture live images of the organism before, during, and after administration of IPL pulses. IPL pulses were delivered with the M22 IPL (Lumenis), with IPL settings used for treatment of DED due to MGD (the "Toyos protocol"). A noncontact digital laser infrared thermometer was used to measure the temperature of the slide. Results: Before the IPL pulses, legs of the Demodex mite spontaneously moved in a repetitive and semicircular motion. During administration of IPL, spontaneous movements of the legs continued. Immediately after administration of five IPL pulses, the temperature of the slide increased from room temperature to 49°C. Immediately afterward, the Demodex mite became completely immobilized. The legs appeared retracted, smoother, less corrugated, bulkier, and less well-defined. Movement of the Demodex mite was not observed at the hourly inspections for 5 h and after 24 h following the application of IPL pulses. Conclusions: Our video directly demonstrates the effect of IPL on a live Demodex mite extracted from a freshly epilated eyelash. The results suggest that IPL application with settings identical to those used for treatment of DED due to MGD causes a complete destruction of the organism.

The efficacy and safety of permethrin 2.5% with tea tree oil gel on rosacea treatment: A double-blind, controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Rosacea is a chronic skin condition that typically affects the face and it results in redness and inflammation. The main risk factors of this disease are Demodex folliculorum, living in the pilosebaceous units. AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safty of permethrin 2.5% in combination with tea tree oil (TTO) topical gel versus placebo on Demodex density (Dd) and clinical manifestation using standard skin surface biopsy (SSSB) in rosacea patients. PATIENT/METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized clinical trial, 47 papulopustular rosacea patients were enrolled, with 35 patients finishing the 12 weeks of treatment. Each patient used permethrin 2.5% with TTO on one side of the face and a placebo on the other, twice daily for 12 weeks. SSSB, photography and clinical rosacea scores according to National Rosacea Society, as well as adverse drug reaction (ADRs) were reported at the baseline, 2nd, 5th, 8th, and 12th weeks. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients were enrolled with papulopustular rosacea, and 35 patients finished the study. The effects of permethrin 2.5% with TTO gel on mite density were significant at week 5, 8, 12 (P value = .001). Clinical features and global assessments showed papules, pustules and nontransient erythema had improvement in drug group after 12 weeks (P values <.05). The improvement of burning and stinging and dry appearance was greater than the placebo gel (P value <.05). Itching in placebo group was significantly more than other group (P value = .002). CONCLUSION: Administration of permethrin 2.5% with TTO gel demonstrated good efficacy and safety in rosacea. This topical gel inhibited the inflammatory effects of rosacea and reduced Demodex mite.

Rosacea: a review of current topical, systemic and light-based therapies.

Rosacea is a common chronic inflammatory disorder of the facial skin characterized by periods of exacerbation, remission and possible progression. The principle subtypes include erythematotelangiectatic rosacea, papulopustular rosacea, phymatous rosacea and ocular rosacea. Although the pathogenesis is unknown, rosacea is largely recognized as an inflammatory disorder. Individual subtypes are likely a result of different pathogenic factors and respond best to different therapeutic regimens. The non-pharmacologic approach to therapy is adequate skin care, trigger avoidance and photoprotection; in addition, there are several topical, herbal, systemic and light based therapies available. Standard Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved treatments include topical sodium sulfacetamide, metronidazole, and azelaic acid. Anti-inflammatory dose doxycycline, a controlled-release 40 mg formulation offers a non-antibiotic, anti-inflammatory treatment option. Combination of azelaic acid or topical metronidazole with anti-inflammatory doxycycline appears to have a synergistic effect. Oral isotretinoin may be effective for phymatous rosacea and treatment resistant rosacea. Light based therapies with pulsed dye laser and intense pulsed light are effective in treatment of erythema and telangiectasias. As our knowledge of rosacea and its therapeutic options expand, a multifaceted approach to treatment is warranted.

Clinical importance of Demodex folliculorum in patients receiving phototherapy.

BACKGROUND: Patients with immunodeficiency are prone to infestation with Demodex folliculorum mites. Ultraviolet (UV) radiation can lead to immunosuppression and sebaceous gland hyperplasia. Although some cases of demodicidosis related to UV radiation exposure have been reported, no studies have been performed on the incidence of D. folliculorum and its clinical characteristics in patients receiving phototherapy. Objective To investigate the effects of phototherapy on the density of D. folliculorum infestation and its clinical characteristics. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. Forty-five patients receiving phototherapy and 43 age- and sex-matched healthy controls were enrolled to the study. The sociodemographic characteristics, occupational information, and skin types (2, 3, 4, or 5) of both patients and controls were carefully recorded. The dermatologic diseases requiring phototherapy, type and number of phototherapy treatments, and cumulative UV doses of all patients were noted. The clinical findings that may relate to demodicidosis were recorded. Standardized skin surface biopsies were taken from three anatomic regions (forehead, cheek, and nasal dorsum) and suspected lesions; five or more D. folliculorum mites per square centimeter of skin was defined as demodicidosis. RESULTS: Twelve (26.7%) patients received psoralen plus UV-A (PUVA) and 33 (73.3%) received narrow-band UV-B. Demodicidosis was detected in 13 (28.9%) patients and three (7%) controls. The difference in the demodicidosis rate between patients and controls was statistically significant (P = 0.01). In eight of the 13 patients (61.5%) with demodicidosis, clinical demodicidosis was present. Demodicidosis was present in seven of the 12 patients (58.3%) receiving PUVA and in six of the 33 patients (18.2%) receiving narrow-band UV-B. The difference in demodicidosis rates between patients receiving PUVA and those receiving narrow-band UV-B was statistically significant (P = 0.02). A statistically significant difference was also found between the mean D. folliculorum densities of patients and controls in all anatomic regions. CONCLUSION: Demodicidosis should be included in the differential diagnosis of facial eruptions in patients receiving phototherapy.