02139nas a2200409 4500000000100000008004100001260001300042653001000055653001200065653000900077653001100086653001700097653002200114653000900136653001700145653001100162653002200173653002100195653001800216653001100234653000900245653000900254653002500263653002600288653002400314653002200338100001400360700001600374700001300390700001300403700001400416245011400430300000900544490000700553520115500560022001401715 2005 d c2005 Jan10aAdult10aBlister10aFace10aFemale10aFolliculitis10aFollow-Up Studies10aHair10aHair Removal10aHumans10aHyperpigmentation10aHypopigmentation10aLaser Therapy10aLasers10aNeck10aPain10aPatient Satisfaction10aRetrospective Studies10aSingle-Blind Method10aTreatment Outcome1 aBouzari N1 aTabatabai H1 aAbbasi Z1 aFirooz A1 aDowlati Y00aHair removal using an 800-nm diode laser: comparison at different treatment intervals of 45, 60, and 90 days. a50-30 v443 a

BACKGROUND: Some laser irradiation parameters such as wavelength, fluence, pulse duration, and spot size have been shown to influence the damage of any target inside the skin, however, the role of some patients' factors such as hair growth cycle is still under debate.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of treatment interval and laser treatment outcome.

METHODS: In a retrospective chart review of 176 patients undergoing laser-assisted hair removal with a diode laser 24 patients were selected. All accepted to cease the therapy, and be followed-up for 5 months. At the end of the study the patients were questioned about the efficacy of the treatment as well as the adverse effects. Hair counting was also performed. The adverse effects (pain, blister or erosion, hyperpigmentation, hypopigmentation, and folliculitis) were questioned during the follow-up period.

RESULTS: The mean hair reduction was 78.1%, 45.8%, and 28.7% in 45, 60, and 90-day interval groups, respectively (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION: The treatment interval was related to the treatment outcome in our study.

a0011-9059