Comparison of the efficacy and safety of home-used intense pulsed light with medical intense pulsed light for hair removal.

IF 2.1 4区医学 Q3 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL Lasers in Medical Science Pub Date : 2025-03-19 DOI:10.1007/s10103-025-04414-x

Yunling Yan, Sha Lu, Shan Wu, Kai Wang, Yunjing Xu, Kui Zhan, Ying Zeng, MaoQiang Man, Bin Yang, Zhenfeng Liu

{"title":"Comparison of the efficacy and safety of home-used intense pulsed light with medical intense pulsed light for hair removal.","authors":"Yunling Yan, Sha Lu, Shan Wu, Kai Wang, Yunjing Xu, Kui Zhan, Ying Zeng, MaoQiang Man, Bin Yang, Zhenfeng Liu","doi":"10.1007/s10103-025-04414-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although many home-used intense pulsed light (IPL) are available for hair removal, whether these devices exhibit comparable efficacy and safety to those IPL used at hospitals is unknown. Therefore, we compared here the efficacy and safety of a home-used UI04 IPL freezing point hair removal device with a Broadband Light (BBL) intense pulsed light hair removal device for hair removal. A total of 84 participants were enrolled from our outpatient clinic. In each participant, the right and the left sides of the axilla, calf, or forearm were randomly assigned to either the observation side treated with a UI04 IPL hair removal device or control side treated with a BBL device for 3 months and were followed up for 3 months. Our results showed that 78 out of 84 (87.6%) patients completed the study. After 1-month treatment, the effective rate of hair removal was significantly higher on the observation side than on the control side (P = 0.001). After 3-month treatment, the effective rates on the observation and the control sides were comparable. The incidence of adverse reactions was similar between the two instruments. Thus, the UI04 IPL and BBL IPL hair removal device exhibit similar efficacy and safety for hair removal.This study confirms that the efficacy and safety of the UI04 IPL as an at-home hair removal device is similar to that of IPL devices, while they are inexpensive, easy to operate, portable, and can be used as an alternative treatment for hair removal. Trial registration 20210454.</p>","PeriodicalId":17978,"journal":{"name":"Lasers in Medical Science","volume":"40 1","pages":"148"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lasers in Medical Science","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-025-04414-x","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although many home-used intense pulsed light (IPL) are available for hair removal, whether these devices exhibit comparable efficacy and safety to those IPL used at hospitals is unknown. Therefore, we compared here the efficacy and safety of a home-used UI04 IPL freezing point hair removal device with a Broadband Light (BBL) intense pulsed light hair removal device for hair removal. A total of 84 participants were enrolled from our outpatient clinic. In each participant, the right and the left sides of the axilla, calf, or forearm were randomly assigned to either the observation side treated with a UI04 IPL hair removal device or control side treated with a BBL device for 3 months and were followed up for 3 months. Our results showed that 78 out of 84 (87.6%) patients completed the study. After 1-month treatment, the effective rate of hair removal was significantly higher on the observation side than on the control side (P = 0.001). After 3-month treatment, the effective rates on the observation and the control sides were comparable. The incidence of adverse reactions was similar between the two instruments. Thus, the UI04 IPL and BBL IPL hair removal device exhibit similar efficacy and safety for hair removal.This study confirms that the efficacy and safety of the UI04 IPL as an at-home hair removal device is similar to that of IPL devices, while they are inexpensive, easy to operate, portable, and can be used as an alternative treatment for hair removal. Trial registration 20210454.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Lasers in Medical Science 医学-工程：生物医学

CiteScore

4.50

自引率

4.80%

发文量

192

审稿时长

3-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Lasers in Medical Science (LIMS) has established itself as the leading international journal in the rapidly expanding field of medical and dental applications of lasers and light. It provides a forum for the publication of papers on the technical, experimental, and clinical aspects of the use of medical lasers, including lasers in surgery, endoscopy, angioplasty, hyperthermia of tumors, and photodynamic therapy. In addition to medical laser applications, LIMS presents high-quality manuscripts on a wide range of dental topics, including aesthetic dentistry, endodontics, orthodontics, and prosthodontics. The journal publishes articles on the medical and dental applications of novel laser technologies, light delivery systems, sensors to monitor laser effects, basic laser-tissue interactions, and the modeling of laser-tissue interactions. Beyond laser applications, LIMS features articles relating to the use of non-laser light-tissue interactions.