Intense Pulsed Light Hair Removal Research Articles

Assessment of adverse events for a home-use intense pulsed light hair removal device using postmarketing surveillance.

Home-use intense pulsed light (IPL) hair removal devices are convenient for consumers. Consumer safety associated with home-use IPL devices, however, remains a subject of interest. In this descriptive analysis, we assessed the most commonly reported adverse events (AEs) for a home-use IPL device from postmarketing surveillance and qualitatively compared these with AEs from clinical studies and medical device reports of home-use IPL treatments. For this analysis of voluntary reports, we queried a distributor's postmarketing database for IPL devices for the period beginning January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2021. All sources of comments, for example, phone, e-mail, company-sponsored web sites, were included in the analysis. AE data were coded according to the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) terminology. Also, we conducted a PubMed search to identify AE profiles from existing literature on home-use IPL devices and we searched the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database for reports on home-use IPL devices. These results were qualitatively compared to the data in the postmarketing surveillance database. A total of 1692 cases involving IPL were identified from voluntary reports of AEs between 2016 and 2021. The shipment-adjusted reporting rate for AE cases (number of AE cases/100,000 shipped IPL devices) was 67/100,000 during this 6-year period. The most commonly reported AEs were pain of skin 27.8% (470/1692), "thermal burn" 18.7% (316/1692), and erythema 16.0% (271/1692). Among the top 25 AEs reported, no unexpected health events were observed. The reported AEs were qualitatively similar to the pattern seen in clinical studies and the MAUDE database associated with such home-use IPL treatments. This is the first such report documenting AEs for home-use IPL hair removal from a postmarketing surveillance program. These data are supportive of the safety of such home-use low-fluence IPL technology.

Analysis on the Current Situation of Regulations and Standards for Home Photoepilators

This article introduces the safety risks of the novel light-based home-use hair removal device, and analyzes the differences in regulation among China, the United States and the European Union. In China, household intense pulsed light hair removal devices will also be supervised in accordance with medical device regulations. Therefore, the safety standards adopted in the absence of specific regulations are no longer applicable to the new regulatory requirements. It is imperative to adopt the new standards available to home photoepilators, so as to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the approved devices.

Intense pulsed light treatment for hidradenitis suppurativa: a within-person randomized controlled trial

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease of the intertriginous areas. HS affects hair follicles causing perifollicular inflammation, resulting in the formation of nodules and painful abscesses. Intense pulsed light (IPL) uses selective photothermolysis to destroy the hair follicles. To evaluate the effect of IPL hair removal as treatment for mild-to-moderate HS. We conducted a single-blinded, clinical randomized trial with patients with Hurley Stage I-II. Patients with symmetrical disease were randomized to monthly unilateral treatment of the axilla or groin. The contralateral side served as internal control. Concomitant treatment modalities for HS were not permitted throughout the study. Efficacy was assessed using Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response (HiSCR), modified Sartorius score (MSS) and patient-reported outcomes. A total of 17 patients completed the trial and were included in the analysis. HiSCR was not evaluated in patients without abscesses or inflammatory nodules pre-treatment. HiSCR was insignificantly different between the intervention side (8/12) and control side (4/10), P=0.467. There was, however, a significant reduction in regional MSS on the intervention side with a median score decreasing from 8.5 (IQR: 6.3-13.5) to 4.5 (IQR 1.8-8.0) post-treatment, P=0.006, and an insignificant score reduction in the control side from 6.0 (IQR: 4.5-8.3) to 5.0 (IQR: 2.5-9.0), post-treatment P=0.492. IPL hair removal resulted in a significant reduction on MSS on the treated area with no significant reduction on the control side. Our study suggests that IPL may be an effective treatment for mild-to-moderate HS.

Ultraviolet radiation after exposure to a low-fluence IPL home-use device: a randomized clinical trial.

The prevailing advice is to avoid sun exposure after intense pulsed light (IPL) hair removal. However, no systematic evaluation of ultraviolet radiation (UVR) after IPL hair removal exits. Therefore, we investigated the occurrence of side effects in subjects receiving solar-simulated UVR after a low-fluence IPL treatment with a home-use device. Sixteen subjects with Fitzpatrick skin types (FST) II-V were enrolled. Three constitutive buttock blocks (4.4 × 6.4 cm) were each subdivided into four sites, randomized to one IPL exposure of 0, 7, 8, or 10 J/cm2 (spectral output 530-1100 nm). Blocks were randomized to no UVR or three standard erythema doses (SEDs) UVR either 30 min or 24 h after IPL. Follow-up visits were 48 h, 1 week, and 4 weeks after IPL. Outcome measures were (i) clinical skin reactions, (ii) reflectance measurements of erythema and pigmentation, and (iii) pain. Subjects with FST II-IV experienced no skin reactions up to 4 weeks after IPL, neither erythema, edema, blisters, crusting, textual, nor pigment changes. Reflectance confirmed no change in erythema and pigmentation (p ≥ 0.090). UVR exposure induced erythema and increased pigmentation. The combination of IPL and UVR induced skin reactions not different to responses from UVR (IPL-UVR vs. UVR, p ≥ 0.164). Pain was generally low (median 1, range 0-4) and correlated positively with fluence and pigmentation (Spearman's rho ≥ 0.394, p < 0.001). One subject with FST V experienced perifollicular hyperpigmentation after IPL and slightly more intense when exposed to UVR. A single UVR exposure of three SEDs either shortly or 1 day after low-fluence IPL causes no amplification of skin responses in constitutive skin of individuals with FST II-IV.

Successful treatment of pilonidal disease by intense pulsed light device.

Pilonidal disease is foreign body reactions accompanied by chronic inflammation that most commonly arises in the hair follicles of the natal cleft or other hair-bearing areas. Today, surgical intervention remains the treatment of choice. But surgical treatment is an invasive method with a high failure rate and recurrence. The authors' objective was to assess the efficacy of intense pulsed light (IPL) device on pilonidal disease. This case series study was carried out between 2008 and 2012 on patients with pilonidal sinus in Qazvin university of Iran. All patients received 6 session treatments with IPL hair removal with 4-6 weeks interval until most of the hair was removed. This was repeated 2.5 ± 0.3 years after treatment. In cases with acute phase pilonidal sinus histopathological examination was done. IPL hair removal procedure was performed on 30 patients with their ages ranging from 16 to 41 years, with a mean (SD) of 23.1 (6.2) years. In this study 13 patients were presented with acute and 6 patients were presented with chronic phase. 11 patients had a positive history of one surgical treatment and presented recurrences. The overall recurrence rate after IPL treatment in this study was seen in 4 (13.3%) patients. The histopathological examination of our study showed that the hair fragments create a foreign body type granulomatous inflammatory reaction. This process could be triggering factor of the disease. IPL hair removal in affected area could be an alternative treatment to surgery or a choice treatment post surgery to decrease recurrence rate.

A randomized double blind, vehicle controlled bilateral comparison study of the efficacy and safety of finasteride 0.5% solution in combination with intense pulsed light in the treatment of facial hirsutism*

Objective: We sought to determine whether topical finasteride can enhance the efficacy of intense pulsed light hair removal. Materials and methods: An intense pulsed light (IPL) treatment with radiofrequency (RF) was performed every four weeks, resulting in up to three sessions, and again at the end of the study – 6 months after the start of the experiment. Each patient also applied either finasteride or placebo solution twice daily to each side of the chin in a double-blinded manner. Results: A total of 77 patients were included in the study. Mean hair density before treatment in finasteride side of the patient's chin was 19.7 ± 11.7 and in placebo side was 19.1 ± 11.3. After three sessions of IPL + RF treatment, combined with twice daily application of finasteride and placebo solutions, at the end of 6-month period mean hair density of 8 ± 6.3 and 9 ± 5.6 was achieved in finasteride and placebo side respectively. Statistically significant difference was found between finasteride and placebo solution. Conclusions: We have demonstrated that the addition of finasteride solution to IPL + RF hair removal may result in a more reduction of unwanted facial hair in women when the combination is used for up to 6 months.

Laser and intense pulsed light hair removal technologies: from professional to home use

Light-based hair removal (LHR) is one of the fastest growing, nonsurgical aesthetic cosmetic procedures in the United States and Europe. A variety of light sources including lasers, e.g. alexandrite laser (755 nm), pulsed diode lasers (800, 810 nm), Nd:YAG laser (1064 nm) and broad-spectrum intense pulsed light (IPL, 590-1200 nm), are available and used widely for such procedures in dermatological/clinical settings under proper supervision. Patient selection and appropriate fluence settings are managed by professionals to maximize efficacy while minimizing adverse events. In the past 5 years, LHR devices have been sold directly to consumers for treatment in the home. In this review, we outline the principles underlying laser and IPL technologies and undertake an evidence-based assessment of the short- and long-term efficacy of the different devices available to the practising dermatologist and discuss the efficacy and human safety implications of home-use devices.

Are home-use intense pulsed light (IPL) devices safe?

The domestic market for home-use hair removal devices is rapidly expanding and there are numerous intense pulsed light (IPL) products now available globally to consumers. Technological challenges for the design of such devices include the need to be cost-effective in mass production, easy to use without training, and most importantly, clinically effective while being eye-safe. However inexpensively these light-based systems are produced, they are designed to cause biological damage to follicular structures, so precautions to prevent both ocular and epidermal damage must be considered. At present, there are no dedicated international standards for IPL devices. This review directly compares three leading domestic IPL hair removal devices: iPulse Personal (CyDen, UK), Silk'n/SensEpil (Home Skinovations, Israel), and SatinLux/Lumea (Philips, Netherlands) for fluence, emitted wavelength spectrum, time-resolved footprint, and spatial distribution of energy. Although each device has a primary mechanical or electrical safety feature to ensure occlusion of the output aperture on the skin to prevent accidental eye exposure, the ocular hazard of each device has been measured to IEC TR 60825-9 standard using an Ocean Optics HR2000+ photo spectrometer for both potential corneal and retinal damage. Using established measurement methods, this review has shown that the measured output parameters were significantly different for the three systems. Using equipment traceable to national standards, one device was judged at its two highest settings to be hazardous for naked eye viewing. This investigation also reports on the significantly different pulse durations of the devices measured and considers the potential impact on safety and efficacy in the light of the theory of selective photothermolysis. Although these devices offer low-cost personal convenience of treatment in the privacy of the home, ocular safety may be inadequate in the event of primary safety mechanism failure.

Paradoxical hypertrichosis and terminal hair change after intense pulsed light hair removal therapy

Background: Although complications such as blister formation, erosion, and post-inflammatory hypo- and hyperpigmentation are well-known side effects of intense pulsed light (IPL) photoepilation, little is known about the paradoxical hypertrichosis after therapy. Objective: To report the paradoxically increased hair density and coarseness after IPL photoepilation. Methods: Within a period of 23 months, a total of 991 hirsute female patients were treated with IPL for photoepilation. The IPL system used was the Vasculight-SR, a multifunctional laser and IPL system (Lumenis Inc., Santa Clara, CA, USA). The cut-off filters frequently used were 695, 755 and 645 nm. Results: Paradoxical hypertrichosis and terminal hair change were detected after a few sessions of IPL therapy among 51 out of 991 patients. Our serial digital photographs, schematic diagrams, and hair counts before and after treatment confirmed the patients’ claims. The other more commonly seen complications were epidermal burning with blisters, erosion, and crust formation followed by post-inflammatory hypo- and/or hyperpigmentation. Conclusion: Paradoxical hypertrichosis and terminal hair change is a common complication of IPL photoepilation.

Burning, paradoxical hypertrichosis, leukotrichia and folliculitis are four major complications of intense pulsed light hair removal therapy

Background: Lasers and intense pulsed light (IPL) are now used worldwide for prolonged photoepilation. Objective: To study the side effects of IPL hair removal therapy among 2541 female hirsute patients as the largest series reported so far in the literature. Methods: The first series of 1000 patients were treated by the Lumina IPL system. (Lynton Lasers, UK). The second series of 1541 patients were treated by Vasculight‐SR, a multi‐functional laser and IPL system (Lumenis, Inc., USA). The fluences used for Lumina varied between 16 and 30 J/cm2. The parameters used for Vasculight‐SR were as follows: fluences ranged from 33 to 42 J/cm2; pulse duration was 3–5 ms, and pulse delay was 20–80 ms. The pulse mode was either double or triple. The parameters were chosen according to the patients' Fitzpatrick skin types and tolerance. The cut‐off filters frequently used were 695, 755, 645 and 615 nm in descending order of their frequencies. Patients were treated every 4–6 weeks and for eight sessions or more. All patients were followed for up to 20 months. Results: Series 1 – burning and its sequelae presented as postinflammatory hyperpigmentation (PIH), postinflammatory hypopigmentation (PIHPO), bulla and erosion, and finally scar formation in 75, 10, 64 and one case, respectively. Leukotrichia, folliculitis, and paradoxical hypertrichosis were recorded in 40, 35, and 12 more cases, respectively. Series 2 – PIH and PIHPO were recorded in 28 and four patients. Erosion and crust formation were recorded in 28 patients. Paradoxical effect, leukotrichia and acne formation were seen in 79, 27 and 19 cases, respectively. Conclusion: Burning and its sequellae, leukotrichia, paradoxical hypertrichosis and folliculitis are four major side effects of IPL hair removal therapy in our study.

Case report: Virilisation of initially obscure origin in a postmenopausal woman

BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & GynaecologyVolume 113, Issue 1 p. 125-126 Case report: Virilisation of initially obscure origin in a postmenopausal woman Cees NM Renckens, Corresponding Author Cees NM Renckens Westfries Gasthuis, P.O. Box 600, 1620 AR Hoorn, The NetherlandsDr CNM Renckens, Westfries Gasthuis, P.O. Box 600, 1620 AR Hoorn, The Netherlands.Search for more papers by this authorFM Van Der Zant, FM Van Der Zant Westfries Gasthuis, P.O. Box 600, 1620 AR Hoorn, The NetherlandsSearch for more papers by this authorMF Hasper, MF Hasper Westfries Gasthuis, P.O. Box 600, 1620 AR Hoorn, The NetherlandsSearch for more papers by this authorJWD De Waard, JWD De Waard Westfries Gasthuis, P.O. Box 600, 1620 AR Hoorn, The NetherlandsSearch for more papers by this author Cees NM Renckens, Corresponding Author Cees NM Renckens Westfries Gasthuis, P.O. Box 600, 1620 AR Hoorn, The NetherlandsDr CNM Renckens, Westfries Gasthuis, P.O. Box 600, 1620 AR Hoorn, The Netherlands.Search for more papers by this authorFM Van Der Zant, FM Van Der Zant Westfries Gasthuis, P.O. Box 600, 1620 AR Hoorn, The NetherlandsSearch for more papers by this authorMF Hasper, MF Hasper Westfries Gasthuis, P.O. Box 600, 1620 AR Hoorn, The NetherlandsSearch for more papers by this authorJWD De Waard, JWD De Waard Westfries Gasthuis, P.O. Box 600, 1620 AR Hoorn, The NetherlandsSearch for more papers by this author First published: 05 December 2005 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00802.xCitations: 1Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL No abstract is available for this article.Citing Literature Volume113, Issue1January 2006Pages 125-126 RelatedInformation

Temporary Hair Color Change from Black to Blond after Intense Pulsed Light Hair Removal Therapy

Temporary Hair Color Change from Black to Blond after Intense Pulsed Light Hair Removal Therapy

Temporary Hair Color Change from Black to Blond after Intense Pulsed Light Hair Removal Therapy

Temporary Hair Color Change from Black to Blond after Intense Pulsed Light Hair Removal Therapy