Skip to main content
Clinical Papers

Facial Photo Rejuvenation Using Two Different Intense Pulsed Light (IPL) Wavelength Bands

PubMed Reference: Bjerring P, et al. Lasers Surg Med. 2004;34:120-6.

Study Details: 

  • 35 subjects (33 females, 2 males) with mean age 46.6±9.5 years (range 33-72), Fitzpatrick Skin Types I-III and substantial photodamaged skin (10 subjects with irregular pigmentation, 13 with vascular lesions, 12 with both)
  • Treated with 2 wavelength bands: 23 subjects treated with 555-950 nm (VL applicator) and 12 subjects with 530-750 nm (PR applicator); spot size of 10x48 mm for both applicators
  • Full-face treatments at 3-4 weeks intervals, repeated until no further improvement:
    • Telangiectasias (if present): 15-30 ms pulse duration, mean # treatments 1.82±0.7 with average energy 14.6 J/cm2±2.7 (VL applicator) & mean # treatments 1.75±0.7 with 14.3 J/cm2±0.6 (PR applicator)
    • Irregular pigmentation (all patients): 2.5 ms pulse duration, double light pulses with 10-ms interval; mean # treatments 1.43±0.51 with average energy 9.9 J/cm2 (VL applicator) & 3 treatments with 7.9 J/cm2 (PR applicator)
  • Blinded photographic evaluation by independent dermatologist, based on 5-point scale: 0%, 1-24%, 25-49%, 50-74% and 75-100%

Study Results: 

  • 82% of subjects showed fair to excellent (25-100%) clearance of telangiectasias with PR applicator
  • 73% of subjects showed fair to excellent clearance of diffuse erythema with PR applicator
  • PR applicator was significantly more efficient than VL applicator (p=0.025) for reduction of diffuse erythema
  • VL applicator induced reduction of irregular epidermal pigmentation with fewer treatments than PR applicator
  • No skin atrophy, scarring or pigment disturbances observed with treatments
  • Combined VL and PR treatments required < than 1/2 the fluence, no active cooling and fewer treatments than conventional treatment with a single-set of treatment parameters