Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41980006›Full record

ArticleDermatology (Basel, Switzerland)2026

Practitioner-Reported Complications in Tattoo Removal.

Mila Poelhekken, Peter J Velthuis, Esther P M Tjin, Darisa A K Quant, Sebastiaan A S van der Bent

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Mila PoelhekkenTattoo Clinic (Tattoo Poli), Department of Dermatology, Alrijne Hospital, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Peter J VelthuisDepartment of Dermatology, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, peter@drvelthuis.nl.
Esther P M TjinResearch Center Healthy and Sustainable Living, HU University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Darisa A K QuantDermal Therapy Studies, The Hague University of Applied Sciences, Hague, The Netherlands.
Sebastiaan A S van der BentTattoo Clinic (Tattoo Poli), Department of Dermatology, Alrijne Hospital, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

<p>Introduction: Q-switched laser treatment is the gold standard for tattoo removal; however, complications such as blistering, scarring, dyspigmentation, infections, and allergic reactions can occur. Potential risk factors include the client's skin type, tattoo age, and ink colour. Moreover, untrained practitioners performing laser tattoo removal and the increasing use of non-evidence-based alternative removal products have raised safety concerns. This study aimed to document practitioner-reported complications in laser tattoo removal, focussing on frequency and associating factors. Secondary objectives were to explore practitioner-reported encounters with alternative removal techniques and treatments performed by untrained practitioners.

methodsA digital survey containing up to 41 questions was distributed among Dutch dermal therapists. The survey addressed treatment protocols, complications of laser tattoo removal, and observations regarding alternative techniques and untrained practitioners in tattoo removal.

resultsOf 173 practitioners, 94 (54.3%) actively practiced laser tattoo removal. Complications were reported in an estimated 8.1% of laser tattoo removal treatment sessions, most commonly oedema (3.0%), blistering (1.9%), and haematoma (0.7%). Hypo- and hyperpigmentation were reported in approximately 0.6% of treatments, while hypertrophic scarring and paradoxical darkening were reported in 0.2%. Keloid formation, allergic reactions, ink blow-out, and infection were each reported in 0.1%. Complications were reported more frequently by practitioners treating clients with Fitzpatrick skin types ≥III, coloured tattoos, permanent make-up, previously treated tattoos, and tattoos younger than 1 year. Among practitioners performing laser tattoo removal, 87% reported treating clients previously treated by untrained practitioners, and 81.7% of these practitioners observed complications. Additionally, 31.0% of all practitioners reported clients who had used alternative removal techniques, with complications observed in 56.7%.

conclusionThis is the first study to systematically report practitioner-reported complications in laser tattoo removal. Although laser tattoo removal is generally safe, complications were more frequently reported in the presence of known risk factors. The widespread involvement of untrained practitioners and the use of alternative removal techniques highlight ongoing safety concerns and underscore the need for further research and consideration of regulatory measures. </p>.

Indexed as

Lasers, Solid-StateLaser TherapyTattooingTattoo RemovalAdultBlisterEdemaFemaleHematomaHumansHyperpigmentationMaleNetherlandsSurveys and QuestionnairesAllergyChemical removalLaserPico-laserTattooTattoo removalUntrained practitioners

Identifiers

PMID41980006
PMCPMC13278705

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.