In the begining “Yes” but now “Absolutely not!” The answer is no. Tanning beds generate UVA or Long Wavelength UV. UVA penetrates the skin very deeply while the shorter wavelengths of UVB do not. UVA is used in photoherapy when combined with a Psoralen drug and the therapy is called PUVA.

In tanning bed antiquity, the UVB content was much higher. Today, in the USA, the FDA has regulated that the UVB content in tanning beds must be very low! Because of regulations, tanning beds produce only 4.2% to 6.5% UVB in the USA and typically 1% to 3% in Europe. To read the US FDA Regulations <Click Here>. The level of UVB radiation is in the following statement “Performance requirements–(1) Irradiance ratio limits. For each sunlamp product and ultraviolet lamp, the ratio of the irradiance within the wavelength range of greater than 200 nanometers through 260 nanometers to the irradiance within the wavelength range of greater than 260 nanometers through 320 nanometers may not exceed 0.003 at any distance and direction from the product or lamp. UVB is commonly defined as 280 to 320 nanometers.

Tanning Salons can be a risk for the typical consumer as the output from these beds can vary greatly from bed to bed and treatment/tanning times must be adjusted based on lamp power. When a bed is re-lamped and you are not told then a sunburn is very likely.

UVA wavelengths pass through the epidermis to the hypodermis Click on the image for a link to this photo's source.

Read this article http://www.pnas.org/content/101/14/4954.full which seems to indicate that UVA may be more dangerous than UVB. This is a complicated subject but it does appear that it is UVA that contributes to premature skin aging and is more likely to cause cancers of the skin.

UNDERSTANDING UV RAYS
“Most everyone is aware of the risks associated with UVB exposure, however there are real risks associated with UVA exposure including skin aging, DNA destruction and even skin cancer. Protecting your skin from UVA rays is just as important as protecting yourself against UVB rays.”  - A quote by Dr. Henry Lim, Vice President-Elect, American Academy of Dermatology and Chairman of Dermatology, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI.

Here’s another posting at this blog on the diferences twixt UVA and UVB. See PUVA vs UVB NARROWBAND.

Don’t be fooled by the non-medical advice of a tanning salon owner! Check with your dermatologist.

]]> http://www.uvbnarrowband.com/index.php/2010/03/tanning-beds-same-as-uvb-or-uvb-narrowband/feed/ http://www.uvbnarrowband.com/index.php/2010/02/replacing-fsx72t12uvbho-7ra-072-with-uvb-narrow-band-tl01-lamps/ http://www.uvbnarrowband.com/index.php/2010/02/replacing-fsx72t12uvbho-7ra-072-with-uvb-narrow-band-tl01-lamps/#comments Sun, 14 Feb 2010 05:00:32 +0000 Chris Cane http://www.uvbnarrowband.com/?p=1038 Many people ask about replacing FSX72T12/UVB/HO (7RA-072) lamps in older National Biological Corporation Panosol II (UVB604) units. It’s a fairly easy job to do. We do supply instructions on how to install UVB NB TL100W/01 lamps in the older systems at time of shipment. All the customer need do is order lamps, provide us with the serial number of the UVB604 that the lamps will be installed in and we will ensure that the FDA records are updated to reflect hat the Panolsol II unit with that serial number has been upgraded to now use UVB Narrowband Lamps.

Best thing to do is email us (support@amjo.net) or give us a call 513-942-2770 and we can get the ball rolling for you.

TITLE: Narrowband (TL-01) ultraviolet B phototherapy for pruritus in polycythaemia vera.

SOURCE: MEDLINE

BACKGROUND: There are several reports of the efficacy of broadband ultraviolet (UV) phototherapy in the treatment of pruritus associated with polycythaemia vera.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether narrowband (TL-01) UVB phototherapy is also effective in treating this condition.

METHODS: Ten patients with pruritus associated with polycythaemia vera were treated with narrowband (TL-01) UVB phototherapy. The first irradiation dose was 2/3 of the minimal erythema dose; the treatment schedule consisted of three irradiation sessions per week, with dose increments of 10% each session for skin types I and II, and 15% for skin types III and IV.

RESULTS: Patients reported a marked relief of symptoms after an average of six treatments (median cumulative dose 1851.52 mJ cm-2, range 1180.4-2468.4). A complete remission of the pruritus occurred within 2-10 weeks of treatment (median cumulative dose 5371.46 mJ cm-2, range 3271.2-7336.3) in eight of 10 patients. Two patients had only a partial and temporary relief of pruritus after two cycles of treatment and a cumulative dose of 3271.2 mJ cm-2.

CONCLUSIONS: Narrowband UVB phototherapy is effective for treatment of pruritus associated with polycythaemia vera, and has the advantage of being less erythemogenic than broadband UVB.

BACKGROUND: Water-induced pruritus is characterized by the development of intense and widespread itching after contact with water at any temperature and without observable skin lesions. Around 40-52% of patients with polycythaemia vera (PV) have water-induced pruritus, and more than 20% of the patients continue with symptoms despite an adequate control of the underlying disease. The aetiology is unknown and treatment is often unsuccessful. We report a patient with a haematologically controlled polycythaemia vera and water-induced pruritus that responded to phototherapy.

METHODS: An 83-year-old woman with haematologically controlled PV referred with intense water-induced pruritus without cutaneous lesions. Topical emollients and oral antihistamines were unsatisfactory and so phototherapy treatment (90% UVA/10% UVB) three times a week was commenced.

RESULTS: Improvement was visible after 1 month and at the end of 3 months the pruritus had disappeared and treatment was stopped.

CONCLUSION: It is considered that the successful treatment in this patient is due to the UVB radiation

BACKGROUND: Water-induced pruritus is characterized by the development of intense and widespread itching after contact with water at any temperature and without observable skin lesions. Around 40-52% of patients with polycythaemia vera (PV) have water-induced pruritus, and more than 20% of the patients continue with symptoms despite an adequate control of the underlying disease. The aetiology is unknown and treatment is often unsuccessful. We report a patient with a haematologically controlled polycythaemia vera and water-induced pruritus that responded to phototherapy.

METHODS: An 83-year-old woman with haematologically controlled PV referred with intense water-induced pruritus without cutaneous lesions. Topical emollients and oral antihistamines were unsatisfactory and so phototherapy treatment (90% UVA/10% UVB) three times a week was commenced.

RESULTS: Improvement was visible after 1 month and at the end of 3 months the pruritus had disappeared and treatment was stopped.

CONCLUSION: It is considered that the successful treatment in this patient is due to the UVB radiation.

Abstract:

I came across this study during an internet search when a customer called me about the use of UVA1. I have to admit I was surprise by the fact that the use of UVA1 has shown some good results with atopic eczema, scleroderma and other challenges.

The authors say

The study is titled “Efficacy of UVA1 phototherapy in 230 patients with various skin diseases” and is written by S. Rombold, K. Lobisch, K. Katzer, T. C. Grazziotin, J. Ring & B. Eberlein of the Department of Dermatology and Allergy Biederstein, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.

To see the entire article << CLICK HERE FOR PDF >>

UVA1 id long wavelength UV in the 340 nm to 400 nm range. UVA1 therapy has been available since the early eighties in Europe and we’re slowly catching up here in the USA. UVA1 phototherapy can be effective in the treatment of inflammatory skin diseases such as exacerbated atopic eczema, localized scleroderma and granuloma annulare.

To see the entire article << CLICK HERE FOR PDF >>

• See http://www.uvbnarrowband.com/index.php/2009/11/uvbnb-and-uva-1-treats-scleroderma/
• See http://www.uvbnarrowband.com/index.php/2009/11/ultraviolet-uva-1-phototherapy-uk-study/

The American Academy of Dermatology’s latest guidelines on the management of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis focus on phototherapy.

Despite therapeutic advances in recent years, phototherapy remains an important treatment option for patients with psoriasis, according to Dr. Alan Menter, chairman of the division of dermatology at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, and his associates.

One area of ongoing investigative research compares narrow-band ultraviolet B light (NB-UVB) with psoralen–ultraviolet A light (PUVA) treatment. While PUVA, usually with oral 8-methoxypsoralen, seems to result in more rapid clearance of psoriasis plaques with fewer adverse events, more research with larger numbers of patients needs to be done.

General Principles

AAD’s phototherapy guidelines recommend that all patients undergo a complete history and physical before undertaking phototherapy for psoriasis. Among those who should not be treated with phototherapy are patients with lupus or xeroderma pigmentosum.

Careful screening is required before undertaking phototherapy in patients taking photosensitizing medications; patients having a photosensitivity disorder, a history of melanoma, atypical nevi, multiple risk factors for melanoma, or multiple non–melanoma skin cancers; or patients who are immunosuppressed as the result of organ transplant, according to Dr. Menter, chair of the AAD Psoriasis Work Group, and his associates.

UVB Phototherapy

UV radiation ranging from 254 nm to 313 nm producing suberythemogenic exposure leads to significant improvement of psoriasis. NB-UVB, which involves use of a bulb that emits light between 311 and 313 nm, has been proved superior to the broadband (BB)-UVB at both inducing and maintaining remission. NB-UVB seems to have immunosuppressive effects that are useful in the treatment of psoriasis.

The guidelines include tables outlining previously published, “well-accepted” dosing regimens for both BB- and NB-UVB (J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 2009 [doi 10.1016/j.jaad.2009.08.026]).

Burning is as common with NB-UVB as with BB-UVB. Data from murine studies suggest that NB-UVB is two to three times as carcinogenic as BB-UVB. However, given that its higher efficacy results in less exposure, NB-UVB may not pose more significant long-term risk of carcinogenesis.

While pregnant women may be at increased risk for melasma from NB-UVB, it is not contraindicated in this population. It should be used as the first-line therapy in pregnant women with plaque and guttate psoriasis, wrote Dr. Menter. Judicious use of NB-UVB should be considered as a second-line therapy in children who do not benefit from topical therapy.

UVB Combination Therapy

There are no randomized studies on the benefit of applying a topical agent in preparation for UVB phototherapy, despite the fact that doing so is a mainstay of phototherapy. The data are mixed on the efficacy of combining the vitamin D analogue calcipotriol with phototherapy. The greatest benefit is seen when it is used in combination with NB-UVB. However, it should be applied after phototherapy to avoid degradation from exposure to UV radiation, according to the guidelines.

The use of methotrexate in combination with phototherapy seems to speed clearance. However, psoriasis may flare once methotrexate is discontinued. Use of retinoids in combination with UVB speeds the therapeutic response, lowering the total exposure to UV radiation, although clinicians have been unwilling to avail themselves of this therapeutic option, according to the authors.

Dr. Menter served on the advisory board of and was a consultant, investigator, and speaker for numerous pharmaceutical companies as have the other 12 members of the work group.

This article can be found in the December 2009 issue of SKin and Allergy News. It was written by Sally Koch Kubetin

Dr. James Nordlund

Today I was reading the Winter Newsletter from Vitiligo Support International and one of the articles was edited and vetted by Dr. James Nordlund here in Cincinnati.

An often-expressed concern of both vitiligo patients and dermatologists is whether having vitiligo increases one’s risk for non-melanoma and/or melanoma skin cancer and if ultraviolet light therapy is a safe treatment. Though there are limited, but growing data, on this subject, key observations have been made which can help both the individual with vitiligo and dermatologist to better assess this risk. To effectively address the question, the information has been separated into these categories.

• Do vitiligo patients in general have an increased incidence of skin cancer?
• Do vitiligo patients have an increased risk of non melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) in their depigmented lesions?
• Do vitiligo patients have an increased risk of melanoma and/or NMSC in their “normal” skin?

Melanin is the substance that gives the skin its color, with darker skin having higher melanin levels. Melanin acts as a sunscreen and protects the skin from ultraviolet light which helps prevent sunburn damage that could result in DNA changes and, subsequently, melanoma. The assumption by many has been that that because the depigmented skin affected by vitiligo has no melanin, that the patient would be more susceptible to some types of skin cancer.

Because there are no melanocytes in depigmented skin, it would be biologically impossible to develop in depigmented skin a melanoma the most serious type of skin cancer. The other forms, the so called basal epithelioma, could develop but are easily treated and are not life threatening.

Unfortunately there are no great statistical studies on cancer in vitiligo. However most research and/or observations indicate that while non melanoma skin cancers do occur in vitiligo patients, they are very rare and melanomas in the normal skin occur at most, in no greater incidence than within the normal population.
An interesting observation on this subject was reported in the book Vitiligo: A Monograph on the Basic and Clinical Science, by Seung-Kyung Hann and James J. Nordlund. Dr. Nordlund observed that in East African countries near the equator, where few work indoors and sunscreen is unavailable, that people with vitiligo not only do not appear to get skin cancer, they exhibit little sun damage to their skin. Other studies also agree that vitiligo patients generally do not demonstrate sun-induced skin damage, despite the lack of protective melanin in the skin.

Ultraviolet light, both natural sunlight and artificial light in PUVA, Excimer laser and narrowband UVB, is an important therapeutic tool for vitiligo. To date, most studies agree that light used in accordance with a supervised treatment plan is a safe, effective method for treating vitiligo. More long term studies will be needed to further assess any skin cancer risk from these treatments.

VSI would like to thank Dr. James J. Nordlund, Professor of Dermatology, Group Health Associates, Cincinnati, OH and Wright State School of Medicine, for his significant contributions to, and medical review of this article.

TORONTO — Narrowband ultraviolet B treatment is effective for repigmentation of vitiligo lesions, according to ratings from 50 patients and their physicians. The technique was particularly successful for lesions on the face and body and less helpful on the hands and feet.

In a second study, 25 patients with photoresponsive conditions reported high satisfaction with use of narrow-band ultraviolet B (UVB) home units, Dr. Jean-Pierre DesGroseilliers said at the annual conference of the Canadian Dermatology Association.

He and his colleague, Kay-Anne Haykal, reviewed the charts of 50 consecutive patients who were treated with narrowband UVB. The mean age at the time of treatment was 41 years.

Effective repigmentation of the face and body and a high level of patient and physician satisfaction are among the advantages of narrowband UVB for vitiligo. An added benefit is a better safety profile than psoralen and UVA light (PUVA) therapy, said Dr. DesGroseilliers of the division of dermatology at the University of Ottawa and Ottawa General Hospital.

The researchers asked physicians and patients to rate the percentage of lesion repigmentation. Poor repigmentation was defined as 0%–33%; good was 34%–66%; and very good was 67%–100%. A total of 24% of physicians and 22% of patients reported good results. Another 48% of physicians and 50% of patients reported very good repigmentation with narrowband UVB.

Disadvantages include poor repigmentation of the hands and feet and a high rate of side effects. A majority of patients—90%—reported adverse events, including pruritus, pain, erythema, burns (particularly to the nipples), blistering of the lips, and/or a herpes simplex outbreak. The investigators said that the advantages of this therapy “far outweigh the drawbacks.”

In the second study presented at the meeting, the same investigators surveyed 25 patients via telephone or computer regarding use of home units of narrowband UVB for maintenance therapy of photoresponsive diseases (J. Cutan. Med. Surg. 2006;10:234–40).

“In a home setting, PUVA is not very practical. Similarly, with broadband UVB, the lower spectrum is more toxic versus narrowband,” said Dr. DesGroseilliers. “Narrowband UVB appears to be safest of the three.”

All patients had successful light treatment at the photodermatology clinic before beginning maintenance treatment at home. Duration of home therapy ranged from 2 weeks to 1.5 years, with a total of 10–200 treatments. Of the 25 patients in the study, 20 had psoriasis, 2 had vitiligo, 2 had mycosis fungoides, and 1 had atopic dermatitis.

All of the patients used Solarc/SolRx home phototherapy devices with Philips 311-nm bulbs. Of the devices, 18 were 1000 Series full-body panels (1760 UVB-NB and 1780 UVB-NB) and 7 were 500 Series hand/foot and spot devices (550 UVB-NB).

[The Solarc Systems are available in Canada. The Philips 311-nm lamps are used in the National Biological Corp systems sold by Amjo]

The researchers asked about insurance coverage for the home units. Three patients had full insurance coverage and six patients had partial insurance coverage, Dr. DesGroseilliers said.

Reasons reported for choosing a home device—patients could give more than one reason—included time (40%); fewer travel expenses (25%); a work schedule that made hospital treatment difficult (17%); and recommendation by a physician (6%).

“Satisfaction of the patients is very, very high,” he said. “One hundred percent agreed they would continue the treatment, repeat it, or recommend it.”

Adverse events included erythema in 36% of patients and pruritus in 8%. “NB-UVB home therapy is effective in comparison with hospital therapy. It is safe and presents few side effects,” said Dr. DesGroseilliers, who said he had no conflicts of interest to disclose regarding narrowband UVB devices.

BUDAPEST, HUNGARY — Narrow-band UVB therapy for psoriasis or atopic dermatitis not only improves the skin disease, but also corrects the serum vitamin D deficiency that is ubiquitous in patients with these dermatologic disorders, particularly during the winter months in northern latitudes, according to Dr. Katja Vahavihu.

It is not clear how long the narrow-band UVB-induced correction of vitamin D deficiency persists, but it does appear to be long lasting, Dr. Vahavihu reported at the annual congress of the European Society for Dermatological Research.

One month after 18 Finnish adults with psoriasis and 18 others with atopic dermatitis completed a course of narrow-band UMB, their serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels remained nearly unchanged from their last treatment session, and well within the normal range.

At baseline, before starting their wintertime course of 15 narrow-band UVB treatment sessions over a 5-week period, 16 of the 18 psoriasis patients and 17 of the 18 atopic dermatitis patients were vitamin D deficient, as defined by a serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D level of 50 nmol/L or less.

After receiving a mean of 71.5 standard erythema doses in a Waldmann UV 7001 cabinet over a 5-week period, the psoriasis patients’ mean serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D level climbed from 36.8 to 96.7 nmol/L, while levels in the atopic dermatitis patients rose from 32.2 to 98.9 nmol/L, according to Dr. Vahavihu.

Levels in 15 healthy controls jumped from about 60 nmol/L at baseline to nearly 150 nmol/L after the 15 narrow-band UVB sessions, said Dr. Vahavihu of the Tampere (Finland) University Hospital. Patient SCORAD (Scoring Atopic Dermatitis) and PASI (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) scores were reduced by more than half with narrow-band UVB therapy.

Dr. Vahavihu reported having no conflicts of interest related to his study.

Bibliography for: “Narrow-band UVB quells disease, boosts Vit. D”

Bruce Jancin “Narrow-band UVB quells disease, boosts Vit. D”. Skin & Allergy News. FindArticles.com. 31 Dec, 2009. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb4393/is_12_40/ai_n45489974

COPYRIGHT 2009 International Medical News Group
COPYRIGHT 2009 Gale, Cengage Learning

I do recommend that you be very cautious for several reasons:

The offshore vendor may be (usually is) offering product(s) that are not approved for use or sale in the USA.

• Products from these vendors are sometimes stopped by US Customs and or the FDA and are typically rejected and you are out of cash!
  • If there are are any warranty issues, returning products for testing/repair can be very very expensive!
• If there are any legal issues then dealing with foreign vendors can be a problem.
• If you are foolhardy enough to purchase overseas then always use a credit card so that if necessary you can try to get any payment or part of a payment reversed by your credit card company.
• Some of these companies say “No Prescription Needed” - This should be a red-flag to you! All UV Ultraviolet systems require a prescription in the USA. If you purchase a non-FDA certified product then you may be in breech of sevreal laws.
• Just because the lamps used are possibly FDA Certified, this does not mean that the system or final product is.
• Check the voltage and frequency. Here in the USA we use 115V 60 Hz. A lot of offshore products operate at 220V/50Hz

There are several vendors/manufacturers here in the USA and we all sell devices that are 510K Certified by the FDA.