Affiliation:
1. Consultant at Ministry of Health, Saudi Arabia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Home-based light and laser devices are effective for the treatment of various dermatological problems
OBJECTIVES To systematically review and evaluate the efcacy and safety of commercially available home-based laser devices for various
dermatological applications
METHOD A comprehensive literature search was performed on Google Scholar and PubMed. Prospective clinical trials were included, while
animal studies, non-English articles, and studies that did not focus on home use or dermatological indication were excluded. A total of 675 articles
were identied regarding home use devices. After screening the articles for inclusion and exclusion criteria, 44 studies involving 1,951 participants
were selected, including 21 randomized control trials, 5 non-randomized controlled trials, and 18 case series.
RESULTS There was signicantly more evidence for the safety or efcacy of Intense pulse light, but this study focused on using home-based laser
devices. Most studies evaluated short-term hair reduction up to 3 and 6 months. Devices were found to be effective for short-term hair removal,
with side effects ranging from erythema and edema to blisters.
The use of laser for skin rejuvenation is based on the fact that laser-treated areas can have islands of healthy skin left behind, which accelerate
recovery. Patients who underwent treatment in a recent prospective, split-face study were evaluated by a blinded dermatologist and showed at least
a 1-point improvement in wrinkles, dyschromia, and diffuse redness in 75% of participants
Low-level laser therapy stimulates hair growth. Patients who used the device for 15 minutes per week for 26 weeks demonstrated signicant
improvement in mean terminal hair density and overall hair growth compared to the control group.
CONCLUSION Available information from current clinical trials indicates that home-based laser devices are adequate for the short treatment of
hair removal, skin rejuvenation, and hair removal. Additional controlled trials are recommended to better quantify the safety and efcacy of
available devices.
Reference32 articles.
1. Adhoute H, Hamidou Z, Humbert P, Lyonnet C, Peuchot MA, Reygagne P, Reynier C, Rivoire S, Simoneau G, Toubel G (2010) Randomized study of tolerance and efficacy of a home-use intense pulsed light (IPL) source compared to the hot-wax method. J Cosmet Dermatol 9:287–290.
2. Alster TS, Tanzi EL (2009) Effect of a novel low-energy pulsed-light device for home-use hair removal. Dermatol Surg 35:483–489.
3. Wadekar T, Sumant O (2020) Home Medical Equipment Market Expected to Reach $56.45 Billion by 2027. Available from: https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/press-release/homecare-medical-equipment-market.html
4. Juhász ML, Levin MK, Marmur ES (2017) A review of available laser and intense light source home devices: a dermatologist’s perspective. J Cosmet Dermatol 16:438–443.
5. Gold MH, Bell MW, Foster TD, Street S. Long-term epilation using the EpiLight broad band, intense pulsed light hair removal system. Dermatol Surg. 1997;23(10):909–913.