Skin Rejuvenation Using Intense Pulsed Light

Long‐pulsed dye laser versus intense pulsed light for photodamaged skin: A randomized split‐face trial with blinded response evaluation

“…Non-ablative rejuvenation with LPDL and IPL is widely used to clear telangiectasias and irregular pigmentation and to improve skin-texture [4][5][6][7][8]20,22]. Randomized and non-RCTs have previously evaluated the efficacy of PDL and IPL rejuvenation showing significant improvements of telangiectasias and irregular pigmentation in up to 89% and 77% of patients, respectively, a couple of months after 2-3 IPL or PDL treatments [4,7,8].…”

“…Randomized and non-RCTs have previously evaluated the efficacy of PDL and IPL rejuvenation showing significant improvements of telangiectasias and irregular pigmentation in up to 89% and 77% of patients, respectively, a couple of months after 2-3 IPL or PDL treatments [4,7,8]. In a recent RCT with a direct split-face side-to-side comparison on the efficacy of IPL rejuvenation versus untreated control skin, it was found that skin texture improved significantly whereas no efficacy was seen on rhytides [7].These results are in accordance with the results from our study, in which no improvement was seen of rhytides from neither LPDL nor IPL, whereas skin texture improved from both treatments.…”

“…Randomized and non-RCTs have previously evaluated the efficacy of PDL and IPL rejuvenation showing significant improvements of telangiectasias and irregular pigmentation in up to 89% and 77% of patients, respectively, a couple of months after 2-3 IPL or PDL treatments [4,7,8]. In a recent RCT with a direct split-face side-to-side comparison on the efficacy of IPL rejuvenation versus untreated control skin, it was found that skin texture improved significantly whereas no efficacy was seen on rhytides [7].These results are in accordance with the results from our study, in which no improvement was seen of rhytides from neither LPDL nor IPL, whereas skin texture improved from both treatments. Other controlled split-face trials have compared the efficacy of the 532-nm KTP laser versus the 595-nm PDL [4] and IPL [9] showing better results on telangiectasias after treatment with the KTP laser versus the PDL laser, whereas comparative results on telangiectasias and irregular pigmentation were found after treatment with the KTP laser versus IPL.…”

“…Several types of nonablative lasers and light sources have been shown effective to treat photodamaged skin, including lasers in the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum [potassiumtitanyl-phophate laser (KTP, 532 nm), pulsed dye lasers (PDL, 585 nm), long-pulsed dye lasers (LPDL, 585, 595 nm)], lasers in the near-and mid-infrared part of the electromagnetic spectrum [diode lasers (810, 1,450 nm), erbrium:glass laser (1,540 nm), Nd:YAG laser (1,064, 1,320 nm)] and intense pulsed light (IPL) systems (500-1,200 nm) [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]. The procedures are well established and associated with little or no downtime, acceptable pain and minimal postoperative inconvenience [12][13][14][15][16][17][18].…”

“…LPDL and IPL systems target the endogenous chromophores haemoglobin and melanin, which results in vessel clearance and reduction of dyschromia due to the concept of selective photothermolysis [4,7,8,17,19,20]. The efficacy of PDL and IPL for the treatment of sundamaged skin has previously been documented in controlled trials, showing substantial efficacy on vessel clearance and reduction of pigmentation [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]. However, so far this is the first trial that compares efficacy and adverse effects of IPL and LPDL rejuvenation in a homogeneous group of patients by a direct side-to-side comparison.…”