Interactive tissue reactions of 1064-nm focused picosecond-domain laser and dermal cohesive polydensified matrix hyaluronic acid treatment in in vivo rat skin

A Randomized, Prospective, Split-Face Pilot Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of 532-nm and 1,064-nm Picosecond-Domain Neodymium:Yttrium-Aluminum-Garnet Lasers Using a Diffractive Optical Element for Non-Ablative Skin Rejuvenation: Clinical and Histological Evaluation

BACKGROUND

The advent of fractionated picosecond (ps) lasers has provided an opportunity to explore new ways of creating microinjuries in the skin to induce skin rejuvenation.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of diffractive optical element (DOE)-assisted ps neodymium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Nd:YAG) lasers with 532-nm and 1,064-nm wavelengths (532-nm and 1,064-nm Nd:YAG P-DOE) using a novel fractional handpiece for the treatment of photoaged skin.

METHODS

An ex vivo guinea pig skin experiment was performed by evaluating the histology of the skin after 532-nm Nd:YAG P-DOE irradiation. A randomized, prospective, split-face study was performed on eight subjects with 532-nm and 1,064-nm Nd:YAG P-DOE.

RESULTS

Based on the histological evaluation using ex vivo guinea pig skin, a reasonable safety profile and the potential to generate effective skin rejuvenation was observed using the 532-nm Nd:YAG P-DOE. Results demonstrated that both 532- and 1,064-nm Nd:YAG P-DOE were similarly effective in improving skin texture and skin pores; however, 532-nm Nd:YAG P-DOE was more effective in treating dyspigmentation.

CONCLUSION

At a preliminary level, this study revealed that 532-nm and 1,064-nm ps Nd:YAG lasers using DOE fractional technology may improve photoaged skin. In conclusion, 532-nm Nd:YAG P-DOE may be especially beneficial for skin with epidermal pigmentary lesions.

Cutaneous Delivery of Cosmeceutical Peptides Enhanced by Picosecond- and Nanosecond-Domain Nd:YAG Lasers with Quick Recovery of the Skin Barrier Function: Comparison with Microsecond-Domain Ablative Lasers

Picosecond or nanosecond-domain non-ablative lasers generate faster photothermal effects and cause less injury than microsecond lasers. In this study, we investigated the enhancing effect of 1064 nm picosecond- and nanosecond-domain neodymium (Nd):yttrium–aluminum–garnet (YAG) lasers on the cutaneous delivery of cosmeceutical peptides. Microsecond-domain fractional ablative CO2 and fully ablative erbium (Er):YAG lasers were also used for comparison. In the Franz diffusion cell study, pig or mouse skin was treated with a laser before exposure to palmitoyl tripeptide (PT)-1, PT-38, and copper tripeptide (CT)-1 at a concentration of 150 μM. Psoriasiform, atopic dermatitis (AD)-like, and photoaged skins were also developed as permeation barriers. The non-ablative laser elicited the ultrastructural disruption of the stratum corneum and epidermal vacuolation. All laser modalities significantly increased the skin permeation of peptides in vitro. The non-ablative laser chiefly enhanced peptide delivery to the receptor compartment, whereas the ablative laser mainly increased the intracutaneous peptide deposition. The picosecond- and nanosecond-domain Nd:YAG lasers elevated the amount of PT-1 in the receptor up to 40- and 22-fold compared with untreated skin, respectively. Laser treatment promoted peptide delivery in barrier-deficient and inflamed skins, although this enhancement effect was less than that observed in healthy skin. Fluorescence microscopy indicated the capability of the non-ablative laser to deliver peptides to deeper skin strata. The ablative laser confined the peptide distribution in the epidermis. Confocal microscopy showed that peptides penetrated the skin along the microdots created by the fractional Nd:YAG and CO2 lasers. The skin barrier function determined by transepidermal water loss suggested quick recovery when using a nanosecond-domain laser (within 4 h). A longer period was needed for the skin treated with the fully ablative Er:YAG laser (76–84 h). Nanosecond non-ablative laser-facilitated peptide delivery may become an efficient and safe approach for cosmeceutical applications.

Wound Healing Profile After 1064- and 532-nm Picosecond Lasers With Microlens Array of In Vivo Human Skin

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to histologically characterize the wound healing process of in vivo human skin treated with 1064- and 532-nm microlens array (MLA)-type picosecond lasers.

STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three patients (Fitzpatrick skin types II-IV), who were undergoing future cosmetic abdominoplasties, were treated with 1064- and 532-nm MLA-type lasers under different fluence settings. Treatments were performed 2 weeks, 1 week, and immediately prior to surgery. Skin samples were harvested from the resected tissue with 8 mm punch biopsies immediately after the abdominoplasties were performed.

RESULTS

The study demonstrates that intraepidermal vacuoles, created from tissue damage induced by the laser, are histologically resolved within 1 week without persistent damage to the dermoepidermal junction or vasculature. After 2 weeks, all foci of microscopic epidermal necrotic debris had either resolved or migrated to more superficial levels in the stratum corneum. There was no evidence of persistent vascular damage, increased melanophages, or accumulation of melanin in the dermis at 2 weeks. Furthermore, the 1064-nm picosecond laser with the high fluence setting demonstrated the capacity to fractionally ablate the epidermis and induce multifocal fibrosis in the papillary dermis in lighter skin types.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to demonstrate the wound healing profile of in vivo human skin after treatment with the picosecond 1064- and 532-nm MLA-type lasers. It shows that laser-induced tissue damage is histologically resolved within 2 weeks, clinically reflecting a favorable safety profile and short downtime. The study also shows that the picosecond laser can be used to induce either fractional ablative or non-ablative effects, depending on the fluence settings used. Lasers Surg. Med. © 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.