Clinical comparison of four hair removal lasers and light sources

Background and objective: There are few clinical studies directly comparing the efficacy of multiple hair removal systems in the same individual. This study evaluates the efficacy of four highly popular systems for laser hair removal. Methods: In this prospective comparison study, 10 subjects underwent treatment of unwanted hair on the back or thigh. Subjects were skin types I–III, aged 18–55 years. All were treated twice with (1) an intense pulsed light with a red filter; (2) an intense pulsed light with a yellow filter; (3) an 810?nm diode laser; and (4) a 755?nm alexandrite laser. Four treatment areas, using commonly accepted parameters for permanent hair reduction, as well as a control non‐treated area were selected. Each treatment area was evaluated with a camera system specifically designed for hair counts at 1, 3, and 6 months after the second treatment by a blinded non‐treating physician. Clinical results and adverse events were also noted. Results: Evaluation of photographs at 1, 3, and 6 months revealed a significant decrease in hair counts (～50%) and hair coverage (～55%). In the hairs that remained after two treatments, no statistical difference was noted in hair length or diameter. There was no statistical difference in efficacy between the four different light devices. Minimal transient adverse effects were noted from all systems. The cryogen spray‐based alexandrite laser showed the highest pain scores. Conclusion: Although hair removal with commonly used systems is, as expected, highly effective, treatment with light‐based devices can cause less pain, yet show efficacy similar to laser systems.     

Evidence-based review of hair removal using lasers and light sources

BACKGROUND: Unwanted hair growth remains a therapeutic challenge and there is a considerable need for an effective and safe treatment modality. OBJECTIVE: From an evidence-based view to summarize efficacy and adverse effects from hair removal with ruby, alexandrite, diode, and Nd:YAG lasers and intense pulsed light (IPL). METHODS: Original publications of controlled clinical trials were identified in Medline and the Cochrane Library. RESULTS: A total of 9 randomized controlled (RCTs) and 21 controlled trials (CTs) were identified. The best available evidence was found for the alexandrite (three RCTs, eight CTs) and diode (three RCTs, four CTs) lasers, followed by the ruby (two RCTs, six CTs) and Nd:YAG (two RCTs, four CTs) lasers, whereas limited evidence was available for IPL sources (one RCT, one CT). Based on the present best available evidence we conclude that (i) epilation with lasers and light sources induces a partial short-term hair reduction up to 6 months postoperatively, (ii) efficacy is improved when repeated treatments are given, (iii) efficacy is superior to conventional treatments (shaving, wax epilation, electrolysis), (iv) evidence exists for a partial long-term hair removal efficacy beyond 6 months postoperatively after repetitive treatments with alexandrite and diode lasers and probably after treatment with ruby and Nd:YAG lasers, whereas evidence is lacking for long-term hair removal after IPL treatment, (v) today there is no evidence for a complete and persistent hair removal efficacy, (vi) the occurrence of postoperative side-effects is reported low for all the laser systems. CONCLUSION: The evidence from controlled clinical trials favours the use of lasers and light sources for removal of unwanted hair. We recommend that patients are pre-operatively informed of the expected treatment outcome.     

Hair removal by lasers and intense pulsed light sources

Unwanted pigmented hair is a common problem for many patients. Traditional methods of hair removal have included shaving, bleaching, plucking, waxing, use of chemical depilatories, and electrolysis. These techniques have been limited by their pain, inconvenience, and poor long-term efficacy. Only electrolysis has offered the potential for permanent hair removal. However, the technique is tedious, highly operator-dependent, and impractical for the treatment of large numbers of hairs. Recently, a number of lasers and other light sources have been developed specifically to target hair follicles. These include ruby, alexandrite, diode, and Nd:YAG lasers and an intense pulsed light source. These devices offer the potential for rapid treatment of large areas and long-lasting hair removal. This article explains the mechanisms of using light to remove hair, examines the attributes of specific laser systems, and explains the importance of patient selection and treatment protocol for the various systems in order to provide a safe and effective treatment.     

Hair removal by lasers and intense pulsed light sources

Laser and flash-lamp technology now offers the potential for rapid, safe, and effective treatment of unwanted hair. An ever-increasing number of published studies have confirmed the long-term efficacy of laser and flash-lamp treatment. The benefits of this technology have largely been limited to individuals with dark hair and relatively fair skin. The first studies using devices with a combination of longer wavelengths, longer pulse durations, and adequate epidermal cooling have shown that it is possible to safely and effectively treat individuals with darker skin types. The remaining challenge is to develop the means to eliminate light-colored hair as well. The increasing consumer demand for low-cost hair removal has driven the development of low-cost hair removal devices, such as small, pulsed flash lamps. The rapid pace of technologic advances and continued studies of hair follicle biology promise to improve this field over the years to come. In the future, small, low-cost laser-razors may replace all other means of hair removal.     

强脉冲光脱毛的疗效观察及分析

目的 观察强脉冲光脱毛的疗效和治疗时间，以及能量密度、毛发部位及皮肤类型对脱毛效果的影响。方法 574例患者，采用美国科医人公司生产的IPL Quantum HR仪器进行治疗。结果 574例患者中，57例患者自动放弃治疗（只治疗了1次未随访，未记入统计数据），517例患者取得了满意疗效，治疗毛发再生减少，再生时间延迟，再生毛发较前细小，色泽较前变淡。治疗早期，2例发生热损伤。结论 强脉冲光脱毛方便快捷，疗效满意，不良反应少．治疗效果在适当能量密度下与治疗次数呈正相关关系，亦与治疗部位有关。     

应用翠绿宝石长脉冲激光脱毛424例临床观察

应用翠绿宝石长脉冲激光对424例面部、躯干及四肢多毛患者进行分析，波长为755nm，脉宽为20ms，光斑直径7－10mm，治疗能量在15－25J／cm^2之间，治疗间隔为3个月。结果：腋下及四肢1次脱毛率约为30％，2次脱毛率约为55％，并呈能量依赖性。发现所有病例均有毛发延迟生长现象，其中55．40％患者出现毛发变细，无任何副作用。     

Comparison of hair reduction with three lasers and light sources: Prospective,blinded and controlled study

Abstract

Objective: The main goal of this study was to compare the hair removal efficacy of three methods: intense pulsed light (IPL), a combination of IPL and radio frequency (RF) and diode laser (810 nm). Methods: Forty participants were treated within three standardized squares on lateral sites on their legs. Each of these squares was treated twice with an interval of 4–6 weeks. The fourth square was left as a control. A blinded physician counted the hairs in each square before the first treatment and 8 months after the second treatment. Immediate and delayed side effects as well as pain scores were recorded. Results: The mean hair count reduction achieved by the diode laser, IPL and IPL+RF was 49.90%, 39.16% and 47.15%, respectively. This study did not show any serious side effects and the number of side effects was minimal. The mean pain scores for the first and second treatments by diode laser, IPL and IPL+RF were 4.65 and 4.58, 2.43 and 2.53, and 3.95 and 4.03, respectively. At the end of the study, a free hair removal treatment for both legs was chosen by patients in the proportion 20 diode laser, 10 IPL and eight IPL+RF. Conclusions: The combination of RF and optical energies proved its safety and efficacy for hair removal, which is comparable with diode lasers and approximately 20% more efficient than ‘pure’ IPL.     

激光脱毛的临床应用

体毛过多是一种常见的美学问题,传统脱毛方法的共同缺点是难以破坏毛母质和毛囊干细胞,故只能达到暂时性脱毛的效果。激光脱毛技术基于选择性光热动力学原理,可选择性地被毛囊内黑素颗粒吸收,产生光热效应,将毛球及毛囊干细胞彻底破坏,产生永久性脱毛,具有方便快捷,安全高效,效果永久性等特点。近年来激光脱毛仪器不断改良问世,受到了广大群众与皮肤科医师的深切关注。该文综述了激光脱毛技术的发展、作用原理、临床应用及相关影响因素。     

The use of lasers and light sources in skin rejuvenation

Smooth, wrinkle-free skin is associated with supposed attractiveness, youthfulness, and health, while rhytids have a negative impact on one’s perceived appearance, image, and self-esteem. Noninvasive esthetic procedures such as laser or light therapy have been used to achieve and attain a more youthful appearance. Currently, there is a wide range of lasers and devices available for the regeneration and healing of skin. Lasers and light sources for skin rejuvenation involve the removal of aged skin tissue via thermal heat from high-powered lasers, stimulating the surrounding tissues to recover through natural wound-healing processes. In contrast, photobiomodulation, which makes use of low energy lasers or light emitting diodes, uses no heat and has shown positive effects in the reduction of wrinkles and improving skin laxity.     

A split-face comparison of facial hair removal with the long-pulsed alexandrite laser and intense pulsed light system

Background: Undesirable hair growth presents a significant problem for many patients. Photoepilation has become a very popular procedure in esthetic and cosmetic practice. Among the systems used are the long-pulsed alexandrite laser (755 nm) (ALX) and intense pulsed light (IPL). Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of long-pulsed ALX and IPL for hair removal. Patients and methods: This comparative study was carried out in the outpatient Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Al-Sadir Teaching Hospital, Al Najaf City during the period from June 2009 to July 2010. Thirty-five patients were included; thirty of them completed the study. They received six treatment sessions with the ALX on the left side of the face and IPL on the right side of face with 4-week intervals between sessions. Response to treatment on both sides of the face was assessed at 1, 3, and 6 treatment sessions. Hair-free intervals and patient's satisfaction were recorded in each visit. Results: After six treatment sessions, IPL-treated sides showed longer median hair-free intervals compared with ALX-treated sides. Reduction in hair counts was significantly larger on the IPL compared with that on the ALX-treated sides at 1, 3, and 6 sessions. Three patients (10%) developed postinflammatory hyperpigmentation, one of them on the left side and the others on the right side. It was more severe on the right side and both the patients were of skin type IV. Slight stinging and burning sensation at time of the treatment were recorded in all patients. All reported side effects were transient and tolerated by the patients except postinflammatory hyperpigmentation which persisted and was decreasing gradually toward the end of the study. Conclusions: The results of this study suggested that IPL is more effective in reducing excessive facial hair growth, with longer hair-free intervals and greater patient satisfaction than the ALX.     

A review of lasers and light sources in the treatment of acne vulgaris.

There are various treatment modalities for acne vulgaris including topical and oral therapy as well as microdermabrasion and chemical peels. Recently, there has been an emergence of novel laser and light sources as a means for treating acne vulgaris. This article will review the advances of laser and light sources in the treatment of acne vulgaris.     

Use of cutaneous lasers and light sources: appropriate training and delegation

In recent years, there has been increasing concern among physicians, patient advocacy groups, and media watchdogs that laser, light, and cosmetic surgery are being practiced by poorly trained professionals, with resulting preventable injuries to patients. In response, several professional organizations have developed guidelines for the delegation of laser services to nonphysician providers. These guidelines delineate appropriate qualifications for delegating physicians and nonphysician providers, and also describe the circumstances and settings in which delegation is appropriate.