Urticaria induced by laser epilation: a clinical and histopathological study with extended follow-up in 36 patients.

BACKGROUND: Laser epilation is the most common dermatologic light-based procedure in the world. We describe a unique side effect of the procedure: a delayed persistent urticarial rash. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study involving 13,284 patients who received laser epilation at our clinics from January 2006 through March 2010 with 755 nm alexandrite laser (MiniGentleLase, Gentlelase, and GentleMax, Candela). Using patient clinical data and photos that were recorded on a standard side-effect report chart, we identified patients with suspected urticaria. Those patients were then followed for a period that ranged from 12 to 63 months. Only patients who could be diagnosed, treated, and followed by the dermatologist at our clinics were included in the study. Patients diagnosed or treated by other physicians or nurses and those without clinical photos or insufficient follow-up data were not included. RESULTS: We identified 36 patients who developed a severe, itchy, persistent hive rash on the treated area 6-72 hours after treatment. Eruption occurred most often on the legs (31 cases), followed by the groin (11 cases), axillae (eight cases), forearms (one case), and upper lip (one case). The eruption consisted of a hive rash with multiple pruritic perifollicular papules and confluent plaques on the treated area. Most patients required oral corticosteroids to control the symptoms. Lesions resolved in 7-30 days. The urticaria occurred mostly after the first treatment (26 cases), and was recurrent in subsequent treatments. Pretreating with oral corticosteroids prevented or limited the eruption. Thirty-three of the 36 patients reported a history of allergic rhinitis or some other allergy. Skin biopsies on four patients showed edema and a deep, dense dermal infiltrate consistent with lymphocytes mixed with eosinophils in a perivascular and occasionally perifollicular pattern in the mid and lower dermis. CONCLUSIONS: Persistent urticaria is a rare side effect of laser epilation. Rupture of the hair follicle by laser heat may trigger a delayed hypersensitivity reaction in a subset of predisposed allergic patients. An antigen from the disrupted hair follicle may be the triggering factor. To prevent this side effect, we recommend that laser epilation in allergic patients be preceded by an extended laser patch test, which should be evaluated 24-48 hours later. Preventive prednisone should be prescribed to patients who develop an urticarial rash on the test area.

Complications of laser dermatologic surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Innovations in lasers, light and radiofrequency devices have allowed for improved therapeutic efficacy and safety and the ability to treat patients with an ever-increasing number of medical and aesthetic indications. Safety remains a primary concern and the timely communication of complications and their management is vital to insure that treatments be as safe as possible. The purpose of this report on the Proceedings of the First International Laser Surgery Morbidity Meeting is to provide laser experts the opportunity to present and discuss complications that their patients have experienced and how they were successfully managed. METHODS: Laser experts were invited to present complications of laser, light, and radiofrequency treatments that their patients have experienced and to discuss the potential mechanisms leading to the complications their management and final outcomes. RESULTS: Nineteen unique cases are presented and the clinical management of each case discussed. Eighteen sets of pre- and post-operative photos are presented. CONCLUSION: This report shows that even experts, with extensive experience using light-based therapies, can and do have patients who develop complications. Sound clinical judgment, and knowing how to avoid complications and their timely post-operative management, is essential to insure optimal therapeutic outcome.

Successful treatment of recurrent pilonidal sinus with laser epilation.

BACKGROUND: Pilonidal disease is a chronic disease of the natal cleft. Recurrent follicular infection is the causative factor. Surgical treatment has a significant failure rate, and recurrence is common. Laser removal of hair in the natal cleft could be an alternative to surgery. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of laser hair removal in the natal cleft on pilonidal disease. METHODS: Six young men with recurrent pilonidal disease were treated with laser epilation in our clinic from 2000 to 2003. Most patients had a history of one or more surgical treatments in the area, and all patients had suffered recurrent folliculitis for years. An alexandrite laser was mostly used, although, occasionally, an intense pulsed light device was used. The number of epilation treatments ranged from 3 to 11, performed at 6- to 8-week intervals. RESULTS: All patients experienced progressive resolution of the folliculitis with the laser epilation treatments. No more surgical treatments have been needed. The treatments were simple and quick, and there were no complications. CONCLUSION: Laser epilation of the natal cleft should be considered a first choice treatment for recurrent pilonidal disease. Preventive laser epilation of the natal cleft in patients with recurrent folliculitis could avoid future surgery.