Laser stimulating hair growth -- published article

Hair Removal Methods Laser hair removal
#1

Hi all,

I’ve seen the concept of LHR causing additional hair growth come up here more than once, and thought I’d share with the community the highlights of an article I read. A clinic in Spain gathered charts from over 500 patients from 1998 to 2005 and shared proportions of patients who experienced various outcomes.

From the article:

Of the 543 patients who received laser/IPL hair photo-
epilation, 57 (10.49%) demonstrated an increase in hair
growth compared to baseline. The increased hair growth
occurred within the area that was treated and also in
the areas bordering the treated area, and appeared thicker
and darker than the hairs initially treated (Figs. 1 and 2).
An additional 44 (8.10%) patients demonstrated no
apparent reduction in hair growth following treatment.
Four hundred twenty-four patients (78.08%) demonstrated
a decrease in hair growth with ongoing treatments.
Only 14 patients (2.5%) were discharged from the clinic
due to near complete hair reduction. These results are
summarized in Table 2.

In our cases, the presence of fine hair prior to treatment
appeared to be the most important factor for increased risk
of paradoxical terminal hair growth. In addition, some
areas appeared to be at higher risk: terminal hair growth
occurred most often in the low maxillary or ‘‘beard’’ area,
neck, lateral cheeks and chin areas in young women with
either skin types II, III, or IV. Patients with hair
stimulation were found in all skin types.

The authors also noted that they had very few cases of stimulated hair growth using ice packs to cool the peripheral areas. They also describe a technique they call “double-pass” where they do a moderate fluence pass and then follow it up with a low-fluence zapp a few moments later.

For those with library access the article is:

Willey, A., Torrontegui, J., Azpiazu, J., & Landa, N. (2007). Hair stimulation following laser and intense pulsed light photo-epilation: Review of 543 cases and ways to manage it. [i]Lasers in Surgery and Medicine 39/i, 297-301

#2

Thanks for sharing this. Very interesting. I wonder if they used the same machine and how settings varied and also if any areas didn’t experience any stimulated growth.

#3

@ LAGirl: Yes, those data are in the tables. I would have liked to see a logit model predict the hair growth using such data, but they didn’t do anything fancy like that.

#4

Here is the article that bryce is referring to. Looks like an alexandrite (candela’s gentle plus) was used in 85% of the cases, an IPL (epilight)in 10% and a Yag (Lyra) in 5% of the cases studied. Some good pictures are present in this article as well. The last paragraph kind of confirms that the number of posts we get here on hairtell shows that laser hair stimulation is not a rare occurrence as previously thought.

After clicking on the link, double click on the title and then the article will appear.

Dee

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=author:Willey%20author:Torrontegui%20author:Azpiazu%20author:Landa%20"Hair%20stimulation%20following%20laser%20and%20intense%20pulsed%20light%20photo-epilation:%20Review%20of%20543%20cases%20and%20ways%20to%20manage%20it."

#5

So according to that article, only 2.5% got what most of my clients tell me they want when they first come to see me at a consultation. The rest will need to (say it with me now) “Finish With Electrolysis.”

As Dee always says, when looking for a good LASER practitioner, do take the time to also look for a good Electrolysis Practitioner as well, because sooner or later, you will need one to finish what you started… statistically speaking that is.

#6

Just looked at it. Thanks Dee. I wonder why they even used Epilight or Lyra, since they’re both the crappiest IPL and Yag.

They don’t say much about this, but it seems that they don’t separate people with coarse and fine hair and the pictures shown are of those with fine hair. So, basically, this is in line with what we advise. I would bet money that everyone who got good and great results was treating coarse hair on popular areas like bikini, underarms, and legs, and those who didn’t treated fine hair on face, upper arms, etc. I would also bet that 100% of those who were treated with Epilight didn’t get results. I’m also curious as to why some people got 24 treatments and others only 3. Basically, I would have liked to see a lot more information and breakdown based on hair types (fine, coarse, location) as well as settings used as they both probably matter the most here in terms of getting results. They seem to be treating all hair on all people on all areas in the same way, which definitely would skew the results. Oh well, better than nothing, right? :slight_smile:

#7

I’ve posted here in the past about my experience with Laser induced facial hair. I now have been using electrolysis and have noticed a remarkable improvement in reduction of hair after only 8 months of weekly then bi weekly treatments. I have patches, and where there is still hair it is a lot finer. A couple of months ago my electrolygist thought it might be a good idea to try a hit of laser to kill off any weak hairs (i was skeptical but willing to try) and i swear it through me back about 3 treatments. I had hair come back where i had patches of nothing for months and it appeared darker. No more laser for me or any of my family (i have 2 daughters, my eldest - 14, has started electrolysis on a few chin hairs.) I just wished i had started on electrolysis all those years ago when all i had was sideburns, but back then (8 years ago) there was no information discrediting laser for the face, believe me i did research before i started the procedure - all the research was positive. I guess you can check my earlier posts for my history.

#8

Nobody really knew about this or they said laser hair stimulation was only a rare occurrence when you had it done 8 years ago. Some didn’t believe the few posters that swore they had more hair than before they started laser. There has been some heated debates about this, especially on the now defunct hair forum “Consumerbeware” with Kitty, Shelby and Judy. Laser is still fairly new, about 11 years old I beleive, so as this information adds up and studies similar to the above study performed in Spain are performed, we will get a bigger picture about this. It is suggested by some laserologists that the stimulated areas be treated with laser as well.

You are another example of electrolysis picking up the pieces after unsuccessful laser hair reduction. Laser works well for some people on some areas, so we must keep that in mind. There are happy people out there whose lives have been changed dramatically by getting laser hair reduction. Somehow, we can’t convince the consumer to have another ace up their sleeve and get on good terms with a skilled electrologist to cleanup the laser leftovers, whether it be a little, alot or even more hair than when they started.

The two modalities working together can be awesome, but there isn’t an area that a skilled electrologist can’t handle if they use modern equipment mixed with decent speed.

Thanks for the update and I’m feeling so very happy for you, hairyoz.

Dee

#9

do not touch your face with laser. stick with electrolysis all the way for your situation. 1. you already know you’re prone to induced growth 2. laser is not a good option for fine hair on a woman’s face. that’s when most induced growth is seen, on that area and that type of hair specifically

#10

I actually attended this presentation when it was given at ASLMS conference in April and had a chance to talk with the presenters. A couple of points.

First, I thought their incidence rate of increased hair was actually a little low. We’ve seen a little higher rate, especially when we treated at lower settings early on in the treatment cycle. Also we tended to see a little higher rate when we used smaller spot sizes and longer pulsewidths.

Their solution is consistent with the concept of stimulating hair growth (whether it is synchronization or induction of long dormant hairs is unclear). The other way to deal with this is using better lasers and more optimized treatments.

As far as their long term prognosis, I was surprised by their low rate of completion. But I think that is because of their non-optimized treatment regimens. My memory is that they tended to treat to quickly, which I think lends itself to more necessary treatments and poorer results. But I also agree that there is a natural synergy between electrolysis and laser.

#11

i know this is an old thread, but i’m interested in laser hair regrowth and stimulation. would people tend to agree that an alexandrite would be the best for not stimulating hair growth? what do you all think?

#12

It doesn’t depend on the machine. It’s best not to treat hair that’s too fine or sparse. And if you do treat, it’s best to treat at high settings. Fine hair and low settings cause this result.

#13

Its true. There are many users who used all sorts of machines and got this problem.

You can check google scholar, there are plenty of articles. Search using 'paradoxical hair growth" and voila