International journal of dermatology · 2005
Hair removal using an 800-nm diode laser: comparison at different treatment intervals of 45, 60, and 90 days.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bouzari Navid, Tabatabai Hossein, Abbasi Zahra, Firooz Alireza, Dowlati Yahya
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Some laser irradiation parameters such as wavelength, fluence, pulse duration, and spot size have been shown to influence the damage of any target inside the skin, however, the role of some patients' factors such as hair growth cycle is still under debate.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of treatment interval and laser treatment outcome.
METHODS: In a retrospective chart review of 176 patients undergoing laser-assisted hair removal with a diode laser 24 patients were selected. All accepted to cease the therapy, and be followed-up for 5 months. At the end of the study the patients were questioned about the efficacy of the treatment as well as the adverse effects. Hair counting was also performed. The adverse effects (pain, blister or erosion, hyperpigmentation, hypopigmentation, and folliculitis) were questioned during the follow-up period.
RESULTS: The mean hair reduction was 78.1%, 45.8%, and 28.7% in 45, 60, and 90-day interval groups, respectively (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: The treatment interval was related to the treatment outcome in our study.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of treatment interval and laser treatment outcome.
METHODS: In a retrospective chart review of 176 patients undergoing laser-assisted hair removal with a diode laser 24 patients were selected. All accepted to cease the therapy, and be followed-up for 5 months. At the end of the study the patients were questioned about the efficacy of the treatment as well as the adverse effects. Hair counting was also performed. The adverse effects (pain, blister or erosion, hyperpigmentation, hypopigmentation, and folliculitis) were questioned during the follow-up period.
RESULTS: The mean hair reduction was 78.1%, 45.8%, and 28.7% in 45, 60, and 90-day interval groups, respectively (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: The treatment interval was related to the treatment outcome in our study.