Dermatology is a rapidly advancing field with many technologies added to the expanding armamentarium of the physician, particularly in the cosmetic sector of the specialty. Patients of all age groups and backgrounds seek treatment for skin conditions; these range from young adults with acne and acne scarring to the elderly requiring skin rejuvenation. energy-based devices (EBDs) are increasingly frequently used for the treatment of different aesthetic dermatological problems. Every technology offers a different mechanism of action, recovery timescale, and adverse effects. New technologies are becoming costlier, and this may have implications on the ratio of service to cost-effectiveness. A well-tolerated EBD procedure that can effectively treat different skin types and multiple skin conditions with minimal adverse effects and shortened downtime might be more economically attractive due to its versatility and favorability among patients and treating physicians alike.Picosecond (PS) lasers were approved by the US FDA in 2012 for the removal of tattoos. 1 The iconic feature of the PS laser is that its pulse duration is less than a nanosecond, achieving a photoacoustic effect and limiting the amount of thermal damage delivered to surrounding tissue. 2,3 Aside from tattoo removal, PS Abstract Background: Picosecond (PS) lasers were approved by the US FDA in 2012 after being shown to remove tattoos with more success and fewer treatments compared with traditional methods. PS lasers were shown to be versatile, indicated for the treatment of lentigines, café-au-lait macules (CALMs), and acne scars and skin rejuvenation.
Objective:We report our experience treating our patients for different indications using a PS laser.
Methods:We performed a retrospective chart and photographic review of all patients seen between 2016 and 2018 that were treated in our centers with a PS laser for nontattoo indications. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using side-by-side comparisons of the clinical photographs by two blinded, independent physicians using a visual analog scale consisting of six levels of treatment response.
Results: A total of 233 patients were studied. Most sought treatment for solar lentigo (27%) and skin rejuvenation (14%). Epidermal nevi exhibited the greatest improvement with treatment, while acne scarring demonstrated the least. Only 24% of patients experienced noteworthy, transient adverse effects. Conclusion: Picosecond lasers were efficacious and safe for a variety of indications. They were effective in treating epidermal nevi and pigmented lesions, such as Lentigines and CALMs. K E Y W O R D S aesthetic improvement, epidermal nevus, laser treatment, picosecond laser, solar lentigines | 613 MEHRABI Et Al.