Document Detail


A comparison of two 810 diode lasers for hair removal: Low fluence, multiple pass versus a high fluence, single pass technique.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  24752608     Owner:  NLM     Status:  Publisher    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: Laser hair removal has become an increasingly popular method to remove unwanted or excessive hair. We have assessed the relative efficacy and discomfort associated with competing hair removal techniques, namely a high average power 810 nm diode laser using an "in-motion" technique with a market-leading 810 nm device with a single-pass vacuum-assisted technique. This study has determined the long-term (6-12 months) hair reduction efficacy and the relative pain induction intensities of these devices.
STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective, randomized, side-by-side comparison of either the legs or axillae was performed comparing the Soprano XL 810 nm diode in super hair removal (SHR) mode (Alma Lasers, Buffalo Grove, IL) hereafter known as the "in-motion" device vs. the LightSheer Duet 810 nm diode laser (Lumenis) hereafter known as the "single pass" device. Five laser treatments were performed 6 to 8 weeks apart with 1, 6, and 12 months follow-ups for hair counts. Pain was assessed in a subjective manner by the patients on a 10-point grading scale. Hair count analysis was performed in a blinded fashion.
RESULTS: There was a 33.5% (SD 46.8%) and 40.7% (SD 41.8%) reduction in hair counts at 6 months for the single pass and in-motion devices respectively (P = 0.2879). The average pain rating for the single pass treatment (mean 3.6, 95% CI: 2.8 to 4.5) was significantly (P = 0.0007) greater than the in-motion treatment (mean 2.7, 95% CI 1.8 to 3.5).
CONCLUSIONS: This data supports the hypothesis that using diode lasers at low fluences and high average power with a multiple pass in-motion technique is an effective method for hair removal, with less pain and discomfort, while maintaining good efficacy. The 6 month results were maintained at 12 month for both devices. Lasers Surg. Med. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Authors:
Bonnie Koo; Kaity Ball; Anne-Marie Tremaine; Christopher B Zachary
Related Documents :
20601918 - Revision stapedotomy: operative findings and hearing results. a prospective study of 65...
22943608 - Carotid stenosis after adjuvant cervical radiotherapy in patients with head and neck ca...
24274958 - Modified tandem traction bow appliance compared with facemask therapy in treating class...
24885438 - Imrt credentialing for prospective trials using institutional virtual phantoms: results...
19276198 - Intravenous administration of nicorandil immediately before percutaneous coronary inter...
19730948 - Laparoscopic appendectomy is the preferred approach for appendicitis: a retrospective r...
Publication Detail:
Type:  JOURNAL ARTICLE     Date:  2014-2-7
Journal Detail:
Title:  Lasers in surgery and medicine     Volume:  -     ISSN:  1096-9101     ISO Abbreviation:  Lasers Surg Med     Publication Date:  2014 Feb 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2014-4-22     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  8007168     Medline TA:  Lasers Surg Med     Country:  -    
Other Details:
Languages:  ENG     Pagination:  -     Citation Subset:  -    
Copyright Information:
© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  Do we need the nerve sparing radical prostatectomy techniques (intrafascial vs. interfascial) in men...
Next Document:  Fate of a novel strobilurin fungicide pyraoxystrobin in flooded soil.