Sadick, 2000 Title: Long-term photoepilation
using a broad-spectrum intense pulsed light source
Authors: Sadick NS, Weiss
RA, Shea CR, Nagel H, Nicholson J, Prieto VG
Journal: Arch Dermatol
2000 Nov;136(11):1336-40
PMID: 11074695
Affiliated institution: 772
Park Ave, New York, NY 10021. nssderm@earthlink.net
Cited in :
The goal of laser or flashlamp photoepilation
is to produce long-term, cosmetically significant hair removal. We document the long-term efficacy
achieved with an intense pulsed light source for photoepilation.
DESIGN: Prospective study comparing long-term
results of single vs multiple treatments, and effects of anatomic
site and skin type on efficacy of photoepilation
with a device emitting broad-spectrum, noncoherent (nonlaser)
radiation from 550- to 1200-nm wavelengths, in
macropulses divided into 2 to 5 minipulses. SETTING: Private
dermatology practice. PATIENTS: Thirty-four patients
(8 men, 26 women) with hirsutism. INTERVENTIONS: Parameters for the study were wavelength of 615
to 695 nm, pulse duration of 2.6 to 3.3 milliseconds, fluence
of 34 to 42 J/cm(2), 10 x 45-mm exposure field, and
application of 1 degrees C cooling gel. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hair removal efficiency, calculated
as percentage ratio of the number of hairs present compared with
baseline counts, and patient satisfaction questionnaire
completed at last follow-up. RESULTS: The mean hair removal efficiency achieved was 76% after a mean
of 3.7 treatments. More than 94% of the sites reached mean hair
removal efficiency values greater than 50%. Hair
removal efficiency was not significantly related to skin type,
hair color, anatomic site, or number of treatments.
Side effects were mild and reversible and occurred in a minority
of patients (hyperpigmentation in 3 and superficial
crusting in 2). CONCLUSIONS: Our data document the long-term
clinical efficacy of intense pulsed light source-induced
hair removal in light and dark skin phenotypes. Maximal
photoepilation was achieved from the initial 1
to 3 treatments; only a small added benefit was seen after more
treatments. Arch Dermatol. 2000;136:1336-1340
|
|