You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 134 No. 2, February 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Study
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (21)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Radiation Therapy
 •Surgery
 •Laser Surgery
 •Dermatologic Procedures
 •Dermatologic Laser Surgery
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Comparison of Responses of Tattoos to Picosecond and Nanosecond Q-Switched Neodymium:YAG Lasers

CDR E. Victor Ross, USN; George Naseef, MD; Charles Lin, PhD; Michael Kelly, MS; Norm Michaud, MS; Thomas J. Flotte, MD; Jill Raythen; R. Rox Anderson, MD

Arch Dermatol. 1998;134:167-171.

Objective  To test the hypothesis that picosecond laser pulses are more effective than nanosecond domain pulses in clearing of tattoos.

Design  Intratattoo comparison trial of 2 laser treatment modalities.

Setting  A large interdisciplinary biomedical laser laboratory on the campus of a tertiary medical center.

Patients  Consecutive patients with black tattoos were enrolled; all 16 patients completed the study.

Intervention  We treated designated parts of the same tattoo with 35-picosecond and 10-nanosecond pulses from 2 neodymium:YAG lasers. Patients received a total of 4 treatments at 4-week intervals. All laser pulse parameters were held constant except pulse duration. Radiation exposure was 0.65 J/cm2 at the skin surface. Biopsies were performed for routine microscopic and electron microscopic analysis at the initial treatment session and 4 weeks after the final treatment in 8 consenting patients. Also, ink samples were irradiated in vitro.

Main Outcome Measures  In vivo, on the completion of treatment, a panel of dermatologists not associated with the study (and blinded to the treatment type) evaluated photographs to assess tattoo lightening. Formalin-fixed specimens were examined for qualitative epidermal and dermal changes as well as depth of pigment alteration. Electron micrographs were examined for particle electron density and size changes (in vivo and in vitro). The gross in vitro optical density changes were measured.

Results  In 12 of 16 tattoos, there was significant lightening in the picosecond-treated areas compared with those treated with nanosecond pulses. Mean depth of pigment alteration was greater for picosecond pulses, but the difference was not significant. In vivo biopsy specimens showed similar electron-lucent changes for both pulse durations. In vitro results were similar for both pulse durations, showing increases in particle sizes and decreased electron density as well as gross ink lightening.

Conclusions  Picosecond pulses are more efficient than nanosecond pulses in clearing black tattoos. Black tattoos clear principally by laser-induced changes in the intrinsic optical properties of the ink.


From the Department of Dermatology, Wellman Laboratories of Photomedicine, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass. Dr Ross is now with the Department of Dermatology, Naval Medical Center, San Diego, Calif.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Regarding Tattoos: Is That Sunlight, or an Oncoming Train at the End of the Tunnel?
Anderson
Arch Dermatol 2001;137:210-212.
FULL TEXT  

Tattoo Darkening and Nonresponse After Laser Treatment: A Possible Role for Titanium Dioxide
Ross et al.
Arch Dermatol 2001;137:33-37.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1998 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.