A rapid tattoo removal technique using a combination of pulsed Er:YAG and Q-Switched Nd:YAG in a split lesion protocol

Laser tattoo removal strategies: Part II: A review of the methods, techniques, and complications involved in tattoo removal

The rising global popularity of cosmetic and corrective tattoos has concurrently led to an increased demand for their removal. While in the past, methods like surgical excision, chemical destruction, and dermabrasion were employed, lasers have emerged as a reliable and effective tool for tattoo removal. Increasing technological options and combination treatment strategies have raised the importance of understanding the various approaches to laser tattoo removal along with their respective clinical impact. This CME aims to describe the multifaceted aspects of laser tattoo removal, including the method selection, application principles, and safety considerations. Furthermore, it addresses the factors considered when selecting the most suitable laser to achieve optimal treatment outcomes.

Q-S laser micro-drilling and multipass full-beam Q-S laser for tattoo removal - a case series

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a new combined method of Q-S laser-assisted tattoo removal. Ten patients with 13 professional, mostly mono-chromatic black tattoos were recruited. All tattoos received the same Q-S laser treatment sequence. An objective evaluation of tattoo clearing was assessed by careful analysis of a standardized collection of digital images taken from each tattoo, 2 months after each laser session, with the help of a custom-made pigment-fading percentage photographic ruler. The percentages of pigment clearance and side effects were evaluated by 4 independent dermatologists. Patient satisfaction and perceived discomfort during and post-procedure were evaluated according to specific scales. Clinical evaluators confirmed an average photographic pigment clearance of 97% after a median 4.85 treatment sessions. The Frac-Tat® method required 40% fewer sessions compared to those calculated by Kirby-Desai estimates. Photographic assessment of laser-exposed skin quality performed 2 months after tattoo clearing was considered almost comparable with untreated peripheral skin, confirming a very low side effect score. The Frac-Tat QS laser-assisted tattoo removal sequence used in our study showed a high degree of safety and efficiency, clearing exogenous pigments in a relatively few number of sessions. Preliminary ablative photo-acoustic fractional 1064-nm Q-S laser micro-drilling was considered an essential step in optimizing tattoo removal, increasing wavelength-independent micro-columnar clearing of deeper dermal exogenous pigments. Our preliminary observations also confirmed a significant improvement of tattoo procedure-induced micro-textural changes thanks to a tissue remodeling effect induced by the 1064-nm Q-S fractional laser photo-acoustic ablation.

Laser tattoo removal: Fundamental principles and practical approach

Tattoos have long become a part of human civilization. However, as the number of people who get tattoos increases, so is the number of people who wish to have their tattoos removed. Compared to other methods, laser-based devices are associated with the best efficacy and least side effects in tattoo removal. Lack of understanding of the fundamental principles of laser and managing its parameters may result in suboptimal result and increased risk of side effects. Recognizing and mastering multiple factors including skin types, nature and color of tattoos, and proper selection of laser parameters such as wavelength, fluence, and pulse, are central in achieving an optimal tattoo removal outcome. This review provides a comprehensive overview on the fundamental principle of laser and practical approaches in tattoo removal.

Comparing the efficacy and safety of laser treatments in tattoo removal: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Although lasers have been the criterion standard for tattoo removal, selecting the best modality can be challenging because of the varying efficacies and adverse effects.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate all lasers used to remove tattoos and assess their efficacies and adverse effects.

METHODS

Our systematic review searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov for all laser treatments. The outcomes measured included laser parameters, treatment methods, patient and tattoo characteristics, clearance rate, and adverse effect rate. The quality of the included articles was appraised by using specific assessment tools and given a high, moderate, or low risk of bias.

RESULTS

Our search led to 3037 studies, with 36 being included in the systematic review (7 randomized controlled trials, 2 nonrandomized controlled trials, and 27 case series). Although quality-switched neodymium-doped yttrium-aluminum-garnet lasers are safe and effective, picosecond lasers have shown superiority with blue, green, and yellow tattoo pigments. Both are safe and effective for black tattoos.

LIMITATIONS

Variability among studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Picosecond lasers show superiority when treating blue, green, and yellow tattoos. The R20 and R0 novel techniques can effectively reduce treatment time. Further randomized controlled trials are required to make a more definitive recommendation.

Efficacy of the Q-switched Neodymium: Yttrium Aluminum Garnet Laser in the Treatment of Blue-black Amateur and Professional Tattoos

Background:

Q-switched neodymium: yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd: YAG) laser at a wavelength of 1064 nm primarily targets dermal melanin and black tattoo ink. Recent studies have shown that this laser is effective in treating black tattoos. There are few studies conducted in India for the same.

Aim:

The aim was to assess the effectiveness of Q-switched Nd: YAG laser (QSNYL) in the treatment of blue-black tattoos following 3 treatment sessions.

Materials and Methods:

This study, a prospective interventional study included a total of 12 blue-black tattoos. Following informed consent for the procedure, as well as for photographs, a questionnaire was administered, and improvement perceived by the patient was recorded. In addition, global assessment score (GAS) by a blinded physician was also recorded. Photographs were taken at baseline and at every follow-up. Each patient underwent three treatment sessions with 1064 nm QSNYL at 4–6 weekly intervals. Fluences ranged from 1.8 to 9 J/cm². The follow-up was done monthly for 4 months from the first treatment session. The response was assessed by patient assessment (PA) and GAS by comparing photographs.

Results:

After three treatment sessions, although no patient achieved clearance, most patients showed good response with few adverse effects. An average of 64.1% (GAS) and 54.2% (PA) improvement was observed in 12 tattoos. Tattoos more than 10-year-old showed quicker clearing than those less than 10-year-old. Amateur tattoos also showed a better response in comparison to professional tattoos.

Conclusion:

Totally, 1064 nm QSNYL is safe and effective for lightening blue-black tattoos in pigmented Indian skin. All patients achieved near complete clearance following the continuation of treatment (an average of six sessions) although this was spaced at longer intervals.

Optimising laser tattoo removal

Lasers are the standard modality for tattoo removal. Though there are various factors that determine the results, we have divided them into three logical headings, laser dependant factors such as type of laser and beam modifications, tattoo dependent factors like size and depth, colour of pigment and lastly host dependent factors, which includes primarily the presence of a robust immune response. Modifications in the existing techniques may help in better clinical outcome with minimal risk of complications. This article provides an insight into some of these techniques along with a detailed account of the factors involved in tattoo removal.