ArticleJMIR dermatology2025
Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of755-nm Alexandrite Laser for Axillary Hair Removal: ِA Comparative Analysis of Single vs. DualFlash lamp Systems.
Article in JMIR dermatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Laser hair removal is a noninvasive cosmetic procedure that targets melanin in hair follicles through selective photothermolysis. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of the 755-nm alexandrite laser for axillary hair removal by comparing single- and dual-flash lamp systems. Methods: In total, 40 women aged 20 to 35 years with Fitzpatrick skin types II and III participated in a study on laser hair removal for their axillae. Participants underwent 3 treatment sessions, each spaced 4 weeks apart, from January to April 2024. They were divided into 2 groups, both receiving treatments with an alexandrite laser (755 nm, 14 mm spot size). The first group was treated with a dose of 8 J/cm² using a single-flash lamp device operating at 5 Hz, with a pulse duration of 10 ms. The second group received doses between 9 and 11 J/cm² from a dual-flash lamp device operating at 2.5 Hz, with pulse durations ranging from 10 to 15 ms. Photographs and hair counts were taken at baseline and 1 month after the final session. A 2-tailed t test was used to assess statistical significance, and regression analysis evaluated treatment effects. Pain scores and side effects were assessed using a visual analog scale in a satisfaction questionnaire. Results: The dual-flash lamp laser achieved an overall hair reduction of 94%, while the single-flash lamp laser resulted in a 91% reduction in the axilla. The difference was not statistically significant (P=.14). No serious adverse effects were reported with either device, indicating effective safety features. Conclusions: The outcomes show that both systems provide similar results in terms of efficacy and safety, with no reported side effects, and results were maintained even after 6 and 12 months of follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.