SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “HAIR REMOVAL”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed1999

Recalcitrant scarring follicular disorders treated by laser-assisted hair removal: a preliminary report.

BACKGROUND: Recalcitrant scarring follicular disorders have been treated previously by removing hair follicles both surgically by scalp resection with skin grafting and with X-ray epilation. Laser-assisted hair removal may provide an alternate method of hair removal with less associated morbidity. OBJECTIVE: The goal is to determine whether laser-assisted hair removal can be used to treat follicular inflammatory disorders by destroying hair follicles. METHODS: Three patients with various scarring follicular disorders (dissecting cellulitis of the scalp, keratosis pilaris spinulosa decalvans, and pseudofolliculitis barbae) were treated with the long-pulse non-Q-switched ruby laser and followed clinically. RESULTS: The patients tolerated the treatments well without significant side effects and noted improvement of their condition along with decreased hair growth in the treated area. CONCLUSION: Laser-assisted hair removal may provide a safe, effective means of treating recalcitrant follicular disorders.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Hair removal in 40 hirsute women with an intense laser-like light source.

Until recently, previously applied methods to remove hair have ultimately proven ineffective or resulted in the formation of scars and small wounds. Different methods for removing hair in a more or less permanent way have been used: electrolysis, thermolysis and the blend method. In this study we describe the removal of hair without side-effects by means of non-laser incoherent emitted light, produced by the ILS flashlamp. In a multicenter study we treated 40 women with a median age of 38.6 years with hirsute hair growth of different hair colours on the upper lip and chin. In general 76.7% of the hair was removed within 6 treatments, with an average fluence of 38.7 J/cm2 and a mean wavelength of 585 nm per patient. A correlation was found between the percentage reduction of hairs and the number of treatments and between hair removal and needle epilation before treatment. Furthermore, a correlation was seen between hair reduction and wavelengths of 570 nm and 550 nm. No association was found between hair removal and clinical data of the patients, nor between hair reduction and technical data of the device. This study presents a new alternative for hair removal.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

A review of the adverse effects of laser hair removal.

Laser hair removal is ever increasing in popularity. Technology is fast advancing, and there are increasingly excessive commercial claims that laser hair removal in all skin types is free of side effects. The aim of this study is to review the evidence from published literature regarding the incidence of adverse effects after laser and light systems for hair removal. A review of the current published literature on the ill effects reported after laser/light-assisted depilation was conducted. Overall incidence of adverse effects after laser/light hair removal appears to be low, with very uncommon permanent sequelae. The two largest studies to date have shown that acute and transient side effects do occur. Higher incidence of pigmentary alterations is associated with the shorter wavelength lasers (up to 19%), particularly with darker skin types, compared with lower incidence using the neodymium-yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser (2-3%). Both studies did not show any long-term side effects or scarring. Laser/light hair removal, carried out by trained professionals, is a safe procedure with a very low incidence of permanent sequelae. The majority of adverse effects are transient and minor. They are more common in darker skin. Longer wavelength devices reduce the risk in darker skin.

Hair Removal↗

PubMed1999

Laser hair removal: where are we now?

The hair removal market is evolving rapidly. The goal has always been long-term epilation. Success is dependent on understanding hair biology and physiology and on knowledge of laser physics, skin optics, and tissue preservation with respect to these emerging laser technologies. These topics will be reviewed, as will specific categories of laser systems in the hair removal arena and the clinical aspects of laser hair removal today.

Electrolysis↗

PubMed2003

Koebnerization of reactive perforating collagenosis induced by laser hair removal.

Laser hair removal, due to demonstrated efficacy and safety, has become a commonly performed office procedure. We report an unusual occurrence after laser hair removal with the 800 nm diode laser that previously has never been described. After laser hair removal treatment to the ventral surface of the ears, a patient developed lesions of previously diagnosed reactive perforating collagenosis. Interestingly, the lesions appeared on the dorsal surface of the ears. Perhaps the koebner phenomenon was invoked as the laser energy penetrated to the untreated dorsal surface, which was not protected by epidermal contact cooling.

Biopsy, Needle↗

PubMed2006

Preoperative hair removal to reduce surgical site infection.

BACKGROUND: The preparation of people for surgery has traditionally included the routine removal of body hair from the intended surgical wound site. However, there are studies which claim that pre-operative hair removal is deleterious to patients, perhaps by causing surgical site infections (SSIs), and should not be carried out. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this review was to determine if routine pre-operative hair removal results in fewer SSIs than not removing hair. SEARCH STRATEGY: The reviewers searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (October 2005), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to 2005), EMBASE (1980 to 2005), CINAHL (1982 to 2005), and the ZETOC database of conference proceedings (1993 to 2005). We also contacted manufacturers of hair removal products. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing hair removal with no hair removal, different methods of hair removal, hair removal conducted at different times prior to surgery and hair removal carried out in different settings. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three authors independently assessed the relevance and quality of each trial. Data was extracted independently by one author and cross checked for accuracy by a second author. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven RCTs were included in this review. Three trials involving 625 people compared hair removal using either depilatory cream or razors with no hair removal and found no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of surgical site infections. No trials were identified which compared clipping with no hair removal. Three trials involving 3193 people compared shaving with clipping and found that there were statistically significantly more SSIs when people were shaved rather than clipped (RR 2.02, 95%CI 1.21 to 3.36). Seven trials involving 1420 people compared shaving with removing hair using a depilatory cream but found no statistically significant difference between the two groups in SSI rates. No trials were found that compared clipping with a depilatory cream.One trial involving 537 people compared shaving on the day of surgery with shaving the day before surgery and one trial compared clipping on the day of surgery with clipping the day before surgery; neither trial found a statistically significant difference in the number of SSIs. No trials were found that compared depilatory cream at different times or that compared hair removal in different settings. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence finds no difference in SSIs among patients who have had hair removed prior to surgery and those who have not. If it is necessary to remove hair then clipping results in fewer SSIs than shaving using a razor. There is insufficient evidence regarding depilatory cream compared with shaving using a razor. There is no difference in SSIs when patients are shaved or clipped one day before surgery or on the day of surgery.

Hair Removal↗

PubMed2006

Preoperative hair removal to reduce surgical site infection.

BACKGROUND: The preparation of people for surgery has traditionally included the routine removal of body hair from the intended surgical wound site. However, there are studies which claim that pre-operative hair removal is deleterious to patients, perhaps by causing surgical site infections (SSIs), and should not be carried out. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this review was to determine if routine pre-operative hair removal results in fewer SSIs than not removing hair. SEARCH STRATEGY: The reviewers searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (October 2005), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to 2005), EMBASE (1980 to 2005), CINAHL (1982 to 2005), and the ZETOC database of conference proceedings (1993 to 2005). We also contacted manufacturers of hair removal products. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing hair removal with no hair removal, different methods of hair removal, hair removal conducted at different times prior to surgery and hair removal carried out in different settings. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three authors independently assessed the relevance and quality of each trial. Data was extracted independently by one author and cross checked for accuracy by a second author. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven RCTs were included in this review. Three trials involving 625 people compared hair removal using either depilatory cream or razors with no hair removal and found no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of surgical site infections. No trials were identified which compared clipping with no hair removal. Three trials involving 3193 people compared shaving with clipping and found that there were statistically significantly more SSIs when people were shaved rather than clipped (RR 2.02, 95%CI 1.21 to 3.36). Seven trials involving 1213 people compared shaving with removing hair using a depilatory cream and found that there were statistically significantly more SSIs when people were shaved than when a cream was used (RR 1.54, 95%CI 1.05 to 2.24). No trials were found that compared clipping with a depilatory cream. One trial compared shaving on the day of surgery with shaving the day before surgery and one trial compared clipping on the day of surgery with clipping the day before surgery; neither trial found a statistically significant difference in the number of SSIs. No trials were found that compared depilatory cream at different times or that compared hair removal in different settings. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence finds no difference in SSIs among patients who have had hair removed prior to surgery and those who have not. If it is necessary to remove hair then both clipping and depilatory creams results in fewer SSIs than shaving using a razor. There is no difference in SSIs when patients are shaved or clipped one day before surgery or on the day of surgery.

Hair Removal↗

PubMed2002

Laser hair removal.

Laser hair removal created controversy when it was first described over 5 years ago. It has now become an accepted modality for long-term hair reduction. It rivals electrolysis in the successful treatment of small hair-bearing areas. It surpasses any modality in the treatment of larger hair-bearing anatomic areas.

Hair↗

PubMed2006

A comparison study of the efficacy and side effects of different light sources in hair removal.

Unwanted hairs are a common problem in which different light sources were developed as the treatment of choice. Alexandrite laser, diode laser, and intense pulsed light (IPL) were clinically used for this purpose with long-term scarce comparative results. The objective of the study was to compare the clinical efficacy, complications, and long-term hair reduction of alexandrite laser, diode laser, and IPL. Clinical trials on 232 persons using diode, alexandrite, laser and IPL were conducted. The number of sessions to reach optimal result varied between 3 and 7. Then the side effects were evaluated. Six months after the last session, optimal hair reduction was observed with no significant differences between the light sources, but a hair reduction was found to be higher using the diode laser. Side effects were observed with all light sources but more frequently with diode. Our findings indicate that all three light sources tested have similar effects on hair removal and in Iranian patients, using lower wavelengths minimizes the side effects.

Face↗

PubMed2004

Laser hair removal.

Laser hair removal is a minimally invasive cosmetic procedure that is well suited to the office-based practice. A great deal of improvement has occurred in the past 5 years with the technology and the understanding of how and for whom the procedure works. A review of the physics of laser-skin interactions is included as well as guidelines for safe and effective clinical treatments. Four wavelengths of lasers and intense light sources have proven successful for a variety of skin types. Average rates of long-term hair reduction, for properly treated subjects, are consistently reported between 70 and 90% at a minimum of 6 months. When performed by physician extenders under the supervision of a physician, maximal use of time and resources can be achieved.

Follow-Up Studies↗

PubMed2005

Direct comparison of EMLA versus lidocaine for pain control in Nd:YAG 1,064 nm laser hair removal.

BACKGROUND: Laser hair removal is an effective therapy for the treatment of hirsutism, hypertrichosis, and pseudofolliculitis barbae. Although side effects are uncommon, pain is described by most patients undergoing long-pulsed neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Nd:YAG) 1,064 nm laser therapy. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy of topical eutectic mixture of local anesthetics (EMLA) versus topical lidocaine (LMX) in pain control for Nd:YAG 1,064 nm laser hair removal. METHODS: Sixty-four patients were enrolled in a double-blind randomized study over a 6-month period. Each patient had half of the treatment area covered with EMLA and the other half with LMX 30 minutes prior to treatment. Neither was applied under occlusion. Immediately following their treatment session, patients completed a visual analog pain scale. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in pain control between EMLA and LMX. However, female test subjects demonstrated lower pain scores than male test subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Nd:YAG 1,064 nm laser hair removal is a painful procedure. Topical anesthetics have been proven to reduce pain for laser hair removal. There is no statistically significant difference between the two most commonly used topical anesthetics for pain control in laser hair removal. Therefore, cost and minimizing potential side effects should guide the physician in selecting the appropriate anesthetic.

Anesthetics, Combined↗

PubMed2001

Laser hair removal update.

Laser hair removal has made possible the permanent reduction of unwanted hair. However, this technology remains far from perfect. Many advances have occurred in the past several years to improve laser hair removal, including lengthening pulse widths and adding mechanisms to cool the skin during treatment. These advances have improved results and broadened the scope of patients who are candidates for this procedure. This article reviews the latest advances as well as the various laser hair removal systems currently available.

Female↗

PubMed2003

Comparative study on a single treatment response to long pulse Nd:YAG lasers and intense pulse light therapy for hair removal on skin type IV to VI--is longer wavelengths lasers preferred over shorter wavelengths lights for assisted hair removal.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety and effectiveness of a long pulsed Nd:YAG (1064nm) laser compared to a shorter wavelength intense pulse light system for assisted hair removal in volunteers with skin type 1V, V and VI. METHODS: Eleven patients of Fitzpatrick skin type IV-VI were recruited into the study. The area treated included the face (upper lips, chin and jaw area), axillae and legs. One half of the body was treated with the long pulse Nd:YAG laser and the other half was treated with the IPL system randomly under topical anesthesia. Degree of pain experienced during treatment, the treatment outcome and any complications were observed. Patients were reviewed at 2 weeks and 6 weeks post-treatment. RESULTS: Volunteers generally described pain from the IPL system as "prolonged burning sensation" but tolerable. Pain from Nd:YAG laser treatment was described as "pinprick" and more intense but tolerable. "Slowing of hair growth"was reported with IPL and Nd:YAG, but with a greater effect from Nd:YAG. Sixty-four percent and 73%(8/11) noticed hair reduction <20% after 6 weeks on IPL and Nd:YAG treated side respectively (ns). Post-inflammatory pigmentation occurred in some volunteers on the IPL treated sides whereas this was not seen on any Nd:YAG treated side, and three of these patients experienced blistering, followed by post-inflammatory pigmentation. CONCLUSION: In our experience the long pulse width 1064 nm Nd:YAG laser, which can penetrate 5-7 mm into the dermis depths to reach the whole length of the hair follicle, would be expected to produce sufficient follicular injury with less epidermal damage in patients with darker skin type compared to shorter wavelength laser and light system.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

The effects of laser-mediated hair removal on immunohistochemical staining properties of hair follicles.

BACKGROUND: The mechanisms involved in laser-mediated hair removal remain unclear. One means of reducing hair growth is alteration of follicular stem cells. OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the effects of laser hair removal on the immunohistochemical staining properties of human hair follicles, including the putative stem cells of the bulge region. METHODS: Treatment of unwanted axillary hair was performed on one side using an 800 nm-wavelength diode laser and on the other side using a 1064 nm-wavelength neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser. Serial skin samples were obtained at baseline and various times after treatment and stained using immunohistochemical techniques. RESULTS: Hair shafts were thermally altered, but the immunostaining properties of much of the follicle, including the bulge region, remained generally unchanged. LIMITATIONS: This study only addressed the acute immunohistochemical changes found after a single treatment using specific laser parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Laser-mediated hair removal does not appear to work by frank destruction of follicular stem cells. Other mechanisms including functional alteration of these cells may underlie the clinical efficacy of the procedure.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Patient satisfaction with laser hair removal.

BACKGROUND: Laser hair removal (LHR) is a widely used treatment for unwanted hair. AIM: To determine patient satisfaction with LHR. METHODS: The clinic offered LHR by long pulse ruby, alexandrite and Nd:YAG. Patients attending the LHR clinic completed a patient satisfaction questionnaire. Satisfaction with LHR treatment was recorded on a linear analogue scale (LAS 0 = laser very much worse than alternative method; 10 = laser very much better than the alternative method). RESULTS: In terms of hair removal, 71% of patients were satisfied with their treatment. Laser treatment compared favourably with electrolysis and waxing. LHR scored 8.6 when compared with electrolysis and 7.7 when compared with waxing. During LHR treatments, 61% of patients used fewer ancillary methods than before. Most patients would recommend LHR to other persons with unwanted hair. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients were satisfied with LHR.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1999

Optical hair removal.

Traditional methods of hair removal have proven unsatisfactory for many individuals with excessive or unwanted hair. In the last few years, several lasers and xenon flashlamps have been developed that promise to fulfill the need for a practical, safe, and long-lasting method of hair removal. Aggressive marketing of these has contributed to their popularity among patients and physicians. However, significant controversy and confusion surrounds this field. This article provides a detailed explanation of the scientific underpinnings for optical hair removal and explores the advantages and disadvantages of the various devices currently available (Nd:YAG, ruby, alexandrite, diode lasers, and xenon flashlamp). Treatment and safety guidelines are provided to assist the practitioner in the use of these devices. Although the field of optical hair removal is still in its infancy, initial reports of long-term efficacy are encouraging.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Permanent hair removal with a diode-pumped Nd:YAG laser: a pilot study using the direct insertion method.

BACKGROUND: The removal of unwanted hair with various laser systems and related procedures has been investigated for many years. All researchers have met difficulty when trying to achieve "permanent" hair removal. In addition, damage to the epidermis and other complications, including hyper- or hypopigmentation in pigmented skin, have occurred because the laser energy was applied indirectly to the hair bulb through the epidermis. OBJECTIVE: To achieve permanent hair removal with the use of a diode-pumped neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser system with an insulated optical needle. Also, to establish laser treatment parameters that allow for quick and effective removal of hair with minimal pain and no long-term medical complications. METHOD: The laser used in the study was capable of producing up to 500 mJ of energy per burst at a 1,064-nm wavelength. A pulse width of 200-500 micros and a burst frequency of 100-200 Hz could be selected, and both defined a subset of the treatment parameter space. An optical needle, typically 130 microm in diameter, was prepared before each new treatment was conducted. Three bursts of energy, 300 mJ each, with a 300-millisecond interval, were delivered through the optical needle into each hair follicle. Between 200 and 300 shin hairs, typically terminal hairs, on each of 5 volunteers were treated. These volunteers were observed over 18.5-30 months for the regrowth of hairs by hair count. RESULTS: At the end of the observation period (6-30 months after the last treatment), 3 of 5 volunteers showed permanent loss of 76%-94.3% of their unwanted hair. One volunteer lost 34.8% of the original hair, but regrown hair was much thinner than the original terminal hair. One volunteer lost only 22.8% of the original hair, and regrown hair was coarse terminal hair. Except for the loss of hair, no change in skin texture, sensation, or skin color was observed. CONCLUSION: The direct insertion optical method (DIOM), delivering laser energy directly to the hair bulb through an optical needle, has proven to be effective and achieves permanent hair removal in 60% of volunteers without medical complications.

Adult↗

PubMed1999

Ruby laser-assisted hair removal reduces the coarseness of regrowing hairs: fallacy or fact?

There have been anecdotal reports that hairs that regrow after ruby laser-assisted hair removal are finer in appearance. If true, this phenomenon adds to the improved aesthetic effect of laser treatment of unwanted hair. It is the aim of this study to determine whether this phenomenon indeed occurs, and if so, assess its permanence and its mode of action. In this prospective clinical study, 71 patients with 94 treatment sites were treated with the Chromos 694 Depilation Ruby Laser. Hair diameter was measured pre-treatment, and at 3 and 7 months post-treatment. In addition, ex vivo scalp skin was used to assess if the ruby laser selectively damaged coarser hairs. Laser-treated and matched untreated skin samples were histologically assessed and the diameters of hair shafts (normal or obviously damaged) were measured. Results of this study were analysed using Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis. There was no statistically significant difference between the hair diameter of non-lasered specimens and the hair diameter of the normal hair in lasered specimens. However, a statistically significant difference was seen between the hair diameter of non-lasered specimens and diameters of damaged hair in lasered specimens (P < 0.05). There was a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05) between pre-treatment and 3 month hair diameters, but no statistically significant difference was found between pre-treatment and 7 month hair diameters. In conclusion, ruby laser-assisted hair removal results in a temporary reduction in hair diameter of regrowing hair. This is not due to the selective targeting of larger hair follicles.

Adolescent↗