Complications of Chemical Peels, Lasers, and Energy‐Based Device Procedures Performed by Core Cosmetic Physicians: A Retrospective Analysis

Abstract

ABSTRACTBackgroundThere has been a proliferation of physicians of different levels of experience and training offering nonsurgical cosmetic procedures. Rising demand, compounded by increasing utilization of new and existing technologies by numerous physician specialties, compels discussion of adequate standardized training and patient safety.MethodsA retrospective chart review of patients who presented to our single site dermatology clinic for managment of complications following chemical peel, laser or energy‐based device treatments performed by core cosmetic physicians between the years of 2013 and 2024 was conducted. Core cosmetic physicians included plastic surgery, facial surgery/otolaryngology, oculoplastic surgery, and dermatology. Charts were reviewed for documentation of the type of complication, procedure causing the complication, and physician credentials, and referral source.ResultsTwenty‐five patients were identified as having complications from chemical peeling, laser treatment or energy‐based devices. Devices implicated included CO2 laser (fractional or fully ablative), chemical peels, 1064 nm long‐pulsed Nd:YAG laser, 1320 nm Nd:YAG laser, intense pulsed light, 595 nm pulsed dye laser, Q‐switched Nd:YAG laser, radiofrequency with and without microneedling, and 1550 nm erbium‐doped fiber laser. Complications included hypertrophic scarring, atrophic scarring, post‐inflammatory erythema, post‐inflammatory hyperpigmentation, and post‐inflammatory hypopigmentation.ConclusionsEven in experienced hands, complications can arise. It is imperative that all physicians offering cosmetic treatments are equipped to recognize clinical endpoints, identify and manage complications, or make a timely referral to decrease the risk of a permanent and potentially devastating esthetic outcome for patients.