ReviewCureus2026
Beyond 532 and 1064 nm: The Role of 785 nm Ti:Sapphire Picosecond Lasers as a Complementary Platform in Tattoo and Pigment Treatment.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Picosecond lasers are increasingly used for tattoo removal and selected pigmentary disorders, but treatment outcomes remain dependent on wavelength, pulse duration, spot size, fluence, pigment chemistry, lesion depth, treatment endpoint, and skin phototype. This narrative review evaluates 785 nm treatment as an emerging complementary option alongside established 532 nm and 1064 nm platforms. A reproducible targeted PubMed/MEDLINE search and structured descriptive evidence extraction were used to identify direct clinical 785 nm studies, mechanistic work, comparator studies, and device-specific regulatory documents. The literature demonstrates that wavelength, laser source, pulse duration, and platform architecture are related but non-interchangeable concepts. Direct 785 nm evidence is limited to small prospective studies, pilot studies, retrospective series, and case reports. The most consistent clinical signal concerns selected cool-colored tattoo pigments, while reports in ephelides, benign facial pigmentation, melasma, and brown dermal melanocytosis remain preliminary. Experimental melanosome-disruption data provide mechanistic plausibility but do not define clinical treatment or safety thresholds. Device terminology also requires caution because nominal 785 nm outputs may be described differently across publications and technical documents. Overall, 785 nm should be considered a target-specific adjunct rather than a universal replacement for 532 nm or 1064 nm treatment. Larger comparative studies with standardized parameters, objective outcomes, longer follow-up, and broader representation of darker skin phototypes are required.
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.