Cargando…

Low-fluence vs. standard fluence hair removal: A contralateral control non-inferiority study

INTRODUCTION: Laser hair removal at lower fluences, delivered under certain conditions, may retain the efficacy of high-fluence lasers while improving tolerability. We performed a pilot study comparing the efficacy, safety and tolerability of laser hair removal using traditional settings compared to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Halachmi, Shlomit, Lapidoth, Moshe
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Informa Healthcare 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3296520/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22129205
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/14764172.2011.634421
_version_ 1782225740751699968
author Halachmi, Shlomit
Lapidoth, Moshe
author_facet Halachmi, Shlomit
Lapidoth, Moshe
author_sort Halachmi, Shlomit
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Laser hair removal at lower fluences, delivered under certain conditions, may retain the efficacy of high-fluence lasers while improving tolerability. We performed a pilot study comparing the efficacy, safety and tolerability of laser hair removal using traditional settings compared to lower fluences, delivered from a larger handpiece and under vacuum. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fourteen healthy participants underwent 5 axillary hair removal treatments with an 800 nm diode laser at 1-month intervals, with follow-up 1 and 3 months after the 5th treatment. In all patients, one side was treated with standard parameters using a 9 × 9 mm chilled tip and gel, while the contralateral side was treated using a 22 × 35 mm vacuum-assisted handpiece at fluences up to 12 J/cm(2). Follow-up assessments were performed after each treatment and at each follow-up visit, and included photography and questionnaires. RESULTS: Eleven participants completed the study and follow-up. All experienced significant hair removal in all treated areas. At the 3-month follow-up visit, the high-fluence and low-fluence treated axillae demonstrated comparable hair reduction. Participants found the lower fluence treatments to be more tolerable. No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Lower fluence diode laser, delivered under conditions of vacuum and using larger spot sizes, can provide significant hair reduction.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3296520
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Informa Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32965202012-03-20 Low-fluence vs. standard fluence hair removal: A contralateral control non-inferiority study Halachmi, Shlomit Lapidoth, Moshe J Cosmet Laser Ther Original Research Reports INTRODUCTION: Laser hair removal at lower fluences, delivered under certain conditions, may retain the efficacy of high-fluence lasers while improving tolerability. We performed a pilot study comparing the efficacy, safety and tolerability of laser hair removal using traditional settings compared to lower fluences, delivered from a larger handpiece and under vacuum. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fourteen healthy participants underwent 5 axillary hair removal treatments with an 800 nm diode laser at 1-month intervals, with follow-up 1 and 3 months after the 5th treatment. In all patients, one side was treated with standard parameters using a 9 × 9 mm chilled tip and gel, while the contralateral side was treated using a 22 × 35 mm vacuum-assisted handpiece at fluences up to 12 J/cm(2). Follow-up assessments were performed after each treatment and at each follow-up visit, and included photography and questionnaires. RESULTS: Eleven participants completed the study and follow-up. All experienced significant hair removal in all treated areas. At the 3-month follow-up visit, the high-fluence and low-fluence treated axillae demonstrated comparable hair reduction. Participants found the lower fluence treatments to be more tolerable. No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Lower fluence diode laser, delivered under conditions of vacuum and using larger spot sizes, can provide significant hair reduction. Informa Healthcare 2012-02 2012-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC3296520/ /pubmed/22129205 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/14764172.2011.634421 Text en © 2012 Informa UK, Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Supplemental Terms and Conditions for iOpenAccess articles published in Informa Healthcare journals (http://www.informaworld.com/mpp/uploads/iopenaccess_tcs.pdf) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research Reports
Halachmi, Shlomit
Lapidoth, Moshe
Low-fluence vs. standard fluence hair removal: A contralateral control non-inferiority study
title Low-fluence vs. standard fluence hair removal: A contralateral control non-inferiority study
title_full Low-fluence vs. standard fluence hair removal: A contralateral control non-inferiority study
title_fullStr Low-fluence vs. standard fluence hair removal: A contralateral control non-inferiority study
title_full_unstemmed Low-fluence vs. standard fluence hair removal: A contralateral control non-inferiority study
title_short Low-fluence vs. standard fluence hair removal: A contralateral control non-inferiority study
title_sort low-fluence vs. standard fluence hair removal: a contralateral control non-inferiority study
topic Original Research Reports
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3296520/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22129205
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/14764172.2011.634421
work_keys_str_mv AT halachmishlomit lowfluencevsstandardfluencehairremovalacontralateralcontrolnoninferioritystudy
AT lapidothmoshe lowfluencevsstandardfluencehairremovalacontralateralcontrolnoninferioritystudy