|
|
|
Home |
Home > Other Hair Removal Methods
Hair Removal - Flashlamps / Intense Pulsed Light (IPL)
Basic facts
Description
Advantages
Disadvantages
Quack
claims
Cost
Background
History
Clinical data
IPL
Basic facts
Some consumers have experienced permanent hair reduction, but
there is limited data on how much hair reduction is typical, and
how often hair reduction occurs.
IPL
Description
Full spectrum light
and low-range infrared radiation are filtered to allow a specified
range of wavelengths.
This filtered light is delivered from
a handpiece into the skin, where it targets dark material such
as the pigment in hair.
This is intended to cause thermal and/or
mechanical damage to a hair follicle while sparing surrounding
tissues.
IPL Advantages
|
|
Some consumers have experienced long-lasting
hair removal or permanent
hair reduction.
Considered safe if performed properly.
Useful for large areas such as backs
or legs.
Regrowth can come back lighter in color
or finer in texture.
Light-skinned consumers with dark hair
have the best results.
IPL
Disadvantages
Long-term data on safety and effectiveness
have not been established.
Response rates have not been established.
Not as effective on unpigmented hairs
and red or blonde hair.
Must be used very cautiously on darker
skin tones or on consumers who tan themselves.
Improper treatment can cause burns,
skin discoloration lasting several months, or patchy/grid-like regrowth.
Requires eye protection.
Can be expensive.
Some find treatment painful.
Regulation varies by state, so inadequate
controls exist to ensure competent practitioners.
Some consumers do not respond to treatment.
IPL
Quack claims
"Painless" or "virtually
painless"
While many clients tolerate flashlamp without requiring pain
relief, it's overpromise to state that treatment will be painless
for all consumers.
"Permanent hair removal"
or "100% permanent" or "permanent"
Some consumers experience permanent reduction of treated
hair over the course of treatment, but published studies have
observed that many consumers are not good candidates, and
even ideal candidates with light skin and dark hair do not
always respond to treatment.
"Guaranteed 0% regrowth"
There is no published clinical data to substantiate this
sort of overpromise.
"Beyond laser"
This marketing term suggests that flashlamp is better than
laser for consumers, but this is not always the case.
IPL
Background
Also called IPL (intense pulsed light), ILS (intense light source),
full spectrum, non-coherent, and broadband light. The primary
differences between flashlamps and lasers used in hair removal
are:
Kind of light
As mentioned earlier, flash lamps do not use one wavelength
of light the way a laser does. Flashlamps emit every wavelength
of light in the visible spectrum, and a little into the band
of infrared radiation (up to about 1200 nm). Practitioners
select a cutoff filter to block out lower wavelengths.
Size and shape of the spot (beam)
Most flashlamps emit a beam that covers more area than a
laser. Most flashlamps also have a rectangular spot, rather
than the round type usually standard on lasers.
IPL
History
Xenon is commonly used as a light source because of the brilliant,
full spectrum illumination it provides when exposed to energy.
Like laser, it can be designed to be extremely powerful and has
industrial applications like paint stripping. It is also used
for items such as the flashes in photographic equipment and in
surgical lighting equipment.
The xenon flashlamp, first developed as an energy source for laser beams, was soon being used therapeutically with direct applications of its energy. As with lasers, flash lamps began to be used for medical purposes in the 1960's. The latter half of the 1960's saw published data on treating eye and skin disorders.
Early attempts in the 1970's to use xenon light energy delivered via fiberoptic filament have not been demonstrated to be permanent. Although these devices (see photoepilators) are still in use, they should not be confused with the devices that became available 25 years later.
By the mid-1990's, researchers were exploring the use of flashlamps for treating vascular lesions. In the year the first flashlamp was cleared by FDA for use in treating vascular lesions,one study noted hair loss as a side effect of treatment. Other papers indicated promising results for some in the treatment of leg veins, prompting one manufacturer to apply for and receive FDA clearance for hair removal in 1997. In 2000, FDA began allowing some brands to claim permanent hair reduction in most skin types.The darkest skin type was not included.
IPL
Clinical data
There is limited clinical data and even
less with long-term follow-up for flashlamps. Arguably the best overview is Tse. Several brief discussions suggest usefulness
without detailing clinical data.
The pilot study observed 60% reduction at 3 months and 75% at 12 months. Another study observed 80% reduction at 8 months. One study with no follow-up observed 77% reduction immediately after a 6th treatment.
Two articles reporting on overlapping patient groups reported 54% to 64% reduction at 6 months. A later study by the same authors observed 76% reduction immediately after a 4th treatment. The study observed 41% of subjects had an average 83% reduction at 12 months or more.
One clinical report found “satisfactory” results at 6 months in 2 transsexuals who received 13 and 41 treatments, respectively. Another clinical report observed one patient had successful removal of transplanted scalp hair grafts with 1.5 year follow-up.
One study had findings which aligned more closely with other reported light-based results, observing an average 33% reduction at 6 months after 2 treatments.
Laser and flashlamp promoters sometimes suggest the devices are very different in terms of effectiveness or side effects, but this is not based on published comparative data.
