Blackheads and whiteheads are commonly treated using ipl laser for pores. Heating the sebaceous glands in the skin induces a tiny explosion, resulting in the glands shrinking and opening up. Your pores will thank you for doing this.
To reduce the appearance of pores, ipl laser treatments direct laser energy at the skin’s oil glands. Light energy is absorbed by the damaged tissue, stimulating the formation of collagen, which helps minimize or shut enlarged pores and also improves other skin issues like redness, sun damage, acne, and texture problems.
Possessing large pores can be an embarrassing problem. For example, it is said that large pores can make you look a few years older than your actual age. The good news is that there is a laser treatment for this condition. Read on to learn more on ipl or microneedling for large pores/best treatment for large pores.
Ipl Laser For Pores
The signs of aging go beyond fine lines and wrinkles. Photo damage is the result of a lifetime of ultraviolet light exposure. The visible signs include pigmentary changes, course skin texture, spider veins, facial redness, enlarged pores, and of course, wrinkles. Intense Pulsed Light treatments are designed to combat the effects of aging with a gentle approach.
What is IPL Photofacial?
Intense Pulsed Light, commonly known as IPL, delivers high intensity computer controlled pulses of light that penetrate the skin and heat the sub-surface layers. The heating action damages or destroys problem conditions like excess pigment and unwanted spider veins, while stimulating healthy, new collagen. A series of IPL photofacial treatments can offer the benefits of a medium depth laser resurfacing or chemical peel without blisters, burns or long recovery time.
Who are the best candidates for IPL Photofacial treatments?
These treatments are best for those who have:
- Red, flushed faces (This can be reduced by 80 to 90 percent!)
- Sun-damaged skin (anywhere on the body)
- Hyper-pigmentation
- Enlarged pores
Who is not a good candidate for IPL Photofacial treatments?
IPL is not a safe option for clients with darker skin types such as African American, south Indian and some darker Middle Eastern skin tones. Chemical peels or the new eMatrix are safer, more effective choices for clients with darker skin who want to treat pigmention issues.
What are Photofacial treatments like?
Generally, 3 to 6 treatments are recommended at 3-4 week intervals. Each full-face treatment takes about 30 minutes, other body areas may take a little longer. Many clients describe the sensation to be like the snap of a rubber band on the skin. There is no discomfort following the treatment. The depth and degree of heat is highly controlled, so there are few risks and you may resume most normal activities right after an IPL photofacial treatment. Your skin may appear flushed, and tiny capillaries may appear more visible. Brown spots can also appear darker and you may experience some slight swelling, but all these changes fade over a period of hours to a few weeks.
What Results Can I Expect?
Beginning with your first treatment, your skin will have a more even tone, with a smoother look and feel. Sunspots will fade, pore size will shrink, and fine wrinkle lines are reduced. Skin redness, flushing and dilated capillaries gradually decrease. IPL Photofacial treatments offer a very high measure of patient satisfaction. A recent study showed that 96% of IPL photofacial clients would recommend the treatment to others. Begin your series today and restore natural beauty to your skin with no downtime!
Before and After Photos
IPL photofacial, also known as IPL photorejuvenation, is a procedure designed to stimulate and encourage healing and regeneration of the skin through the application of a broad-spectrum light. “IPL,” in fact, stands for “intense pulsed light”. While this therapy is not as concentrated as laser treatment, it can nevertheless have incredibly beneficial effects on the skin.
What is intense pulsed light (IPL) therapy?
The IPL photofacial involves the use of an intense beam of broad-spectrum light (as opposed to lasers, which operate within a very specific wavelength) that targets the dermis, the lower layer of the skin. The procedure simultaneously removes damaged and photoaged skin while stimulating collagen growth. IPL photorejuvenation therapy can improve the color, consistency, and texture of the skin all at once.
What does IPL photofacial treat?
IPL photofacials can treat a wide variety of skin problems. They can be used to remove redness from broken capillaries and can help with rosacea. They can treat brown spots and freckles from sun damage and can also help to smooth uneven skin texture and close large pores.
Are fotofacial, photofacial, and photorejuvenation the same thing?
Yes. These terms all refer to skin rejuvenation treatments using IPL.
Is IPL photorejuvenation safe?
IPL photorejuvenation is one of the safest light-based skin rejuvenation treatments available. Most clients experience little or no pain during the procedure. Some patients have reported that the light pulses feel similar to a light “snap” from a rubber band. There have been few reported long-term side effects of IPL photorejuvenation, and the most common side effects — redness, minor swelling, and inflammation — usually go away within a few hours to a few days after treatment.
What results can I expect after IPL treatment?
Immediately after your treatment, your face will appear slightly red or flushed, but this is completely normal. It will take several hours to a day or so for the treatment’s results to become noticeable. The redness will fade, and you will see improvements more and more. Depending on the condition you are treating, your experience will differ. For example, if you are treating a lot of brown spots or freckles, the areas may get darker before fading or flaking off in a few days to a few weeks. Though recovery from IPL photorejuventation is rapid, it is important to keep in mind that sunscreen is vital to ensuring the results of the procedure last as long as possible. Be sure to protect the treated area from the sun for at least a couple of weeks, either by covering the area or wearing strong sunscreen.
Are multiple treatment sessions recommended?
Depending on the area being treated and the severity of the problem, multiple treatment sessions may be recommended. For many problems, clients will need between three and six initial corrective treatments followed by periodic maintenance.
Are there side effects associated with IPL photorejuvenation?
Most reported side effects of IPL photorejuvenation are mild and resolve themselves within a few hours or days of treatment. The most common side effect is facial redness or flushing. Small capillaries may appear larger immediately following treatment as well — but don’t worry; this is common and will fade quickly. In rarer instances, mild bruising and swelling may occur, but this too will go away within a day or so. Permanent side effects from photorejuvenation are extremely rare. Ready for better looking skin?
Best Treatment For Large Pores
Using a cleanser with salicylic acid may help. Studies show salicylic acid can unclog pores. Some cleansers containing salicylic acid are gentle enough to use every day. If the salicylic acid dries or irritates your skin, try alternating cleansers
The word “non-comedogenic” means the product won’t clog your pores. When pores clog, they expand, which can make your pores look more noticeable.
To avoid clogged pores, look for one of the following terms on everything you apply to your face:
- Non-comedogenic
- Oil free
- Won’t clog pores
If you don’t see one of these terms, don’t use the product.
Cleanse your face twice a day
Clogged pores or an oily complexion can make pores look larger. Cleansing twice daily can unclog pores, prevent clogged pores, and reduce oiliness. When cleansing your face, you’ll want to:
- Use warm water. Hot water can irritate your skin, causing pores to look larger.
- Gently wash your face. Scrubbing can irritate your skin, causing inflammation. When skin is inflamed, pores tend to be more noticeable.
- Find a gentle, non-comedogenic cleanser. Again, you want to do everything you can to stop irritating your skin and stop clogging your pores.
Use retinol
If you have oily skin, mild acne, or your skin appears less firm than it once was, pores can look larger. Using a skin care product with retinol or retinyl palmitate may help. For best results, apply the product before going to bed.
Some people find that this type of skin care product irritates their skin. You can prevent this by washing your face and then waiting 30 minutes to apply the product.
If you’re pregnant or breastfeeding, you shouldn’t use a product containing retinol or retinyl palmitate.
Treat acne
Acne clogs your pores, which can make your pores more noticeable.
Using a cleanser with salicylic acid may help. Studies show salicylic acid can unclog pores. Some cleansers containing salicylic acid are gentle enough to use every day.
If the salicylic acid dries or irritates your skin, try alternating cleansers. Use a mild, non-comedogenic cleanser when you wake up and the salicylic acid cleanser before bed.
Many people who have acne need more than salicylic acne to control their acne. You’ll find more information about how to treat acne at, Acne: Diagnosis and treatment.
Protect your face with sunscreen every day
The more sun damaged your skin, the less firmness it has. When skin starts to lose its firmness, pores look more noticeable.
Applying a broad-spectrum, water resistant sunscreen with an SPF 30 or higher helps prevent sun-damaged skin. To protect your skin, apply sunscreen every day, even when it’s raining or cold outside. Every time the sun’s rays hit our skin, they can damage our skin. This damage builds up over time.
Exfoliate
Exfoliating may make pores less noticeable. To get the results you want, you need to exfoliate safely to avoid damaging your skin. You can find out how to do this by watching, How to safely exfoliate at home.
If exfoliating your skin makes you uncomfortable or you aren’t sure this is right for you, a board-certified dermatologist can help. By seeing a dermatologist, you can find out whether exfoliating may help make your pores less noticeable. A dermatologist may also be able to exfoliate your skin during an office visit.
Be gentle with your skin
Scrubbing your face won’t make it any cleaner, but scrubbing can irritate your skin, which can make your pores look larger.
Picking at, squeezing, or digging into your pores can also irritate your skin, making pores look more noticeable.
For these reasons, you want to be very gentle with your skin. Never scrub, rub, pick at, or squeeze the skin on your face.
Importance Keratosis pilaris (KP) is a common skin disorder of follicular prominence and erythema that typically affects the proximal extremities, can be disfiguring, and is often resistant to treatment. Shorter-wavelength vascular lasers have been used to reduce the associated erythema but not the textural irregularity.
Objective To determine whether the longer-wavelength 810-nm diode laser may be effective for treatment of KP, particularly the associated skin roughness/bumpiness and textural irregularity.
Design, Setting, and Participants We performed a split-body, rater-blinded, parallel-group, balanced (1:1), placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial at a dermatology outpatient practice of an urban academic medical center from March 1 to October 1, 2011. We included all patients diagnosed as having KP on both arms and Fitzpatrick skin types I through III. Of the 26 patients who underwent screening, 23 met our enrollment criteria. Of these, 18 patients completed the study, 3 were lost to or unavailable for follow-up, and 2 withdrew owing to inflammatory hyperpigmentation after the laser treatment.
Interventions Patients were randomized to receive laser treatment on the right or left arm. Each patient received treatment with the 810-nm pulsed diode laser to the arm randomized to be the treatment site. Treatments were repeated twice, for a total of 3 treatment visits spaced 4 to 5 weeks apart.
Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome measure was the difference in disease severity score, including redness and roughness/bumpiness, with each graded on a scale of 0 (least severe) to 3 (most severe), between the treated and control sites. Two blinded dermatologists rated the sites at 12 weeks after the initial visit.
Results At follow-up, the median redness score reported by the 2 blinded raters for the treatment and control sides was 2.0 (interquartile range [IQR], 1-2; P = .11). The median roughness/bumpiness score was 1.0 (IQR, 1-2) for the treatment sides and 2.0 (IQR, 1-2) for the control sides, a difference of 1 (P = .004). The median overall score combining erythema and roughness/bumpiness was 3.0 (IQR, 2-4) for the treatment sides and 4.0 (IQR, 3-5) for the control sides, a difference of 1 (P = .005).
Conclusions and Relevance Three treatments with the 810-nm diode laser may induce significant improvements in skin texture and roughness/bumpiness in KP patients with Fitzpatrick skin types I through III, but baseline erythema is not improved. Complete treatment of erythema and texture in KP may require diode laser treatment combined with other laser or medical modalities that address redness.
Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01281644
Introduction
Keratosis pilaris (KP) is a common hereditary, benign disorder of unknown etiology1 that is frequently seen in conjunction with atopy. The hereditary pattern of this skin disorder is thought to be autosomal dominant without a known predisposition based on race or sex.2 Keratinaceous plugging of follicles results in markedly visible papules, often involving the lateral and extensor aspects of the proximal extremities but sometimes also the face, buttocks, and trunk.3 Perifollicular erythema is routinely notable.4 Topical treatments for KP include emollients, exfoliants, and anti-inflammatory agents, such as urea, salicylic acid, lactic acid, topical corticosteroids, topical retinoids, and cholecalciferol. Because most patients obtain limited benefit from these treatments, less conventional treatments, including phototherapy and lasers, have been explored. Among lasers, the 532-, 585-, and 595-nm vascular devices have been used with modest success, particularly in reducing redness.5–8 Longer-wavelength lasers have not been studied for the treatment of KP, and lasers have not been shown to be successful for treating the textural components of KP. Our study investigates the effectiveness of the longer-wavelength 810-nm diode laser for color and texture of upper extremity KP.
Methods
Study Design
We performed a split-body, parallel-group, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial with an allocation ratio of 1:1 and a block size of 2 at an urban academic medical center. The unit of randomization was the individual unilateral upper extremity. The study was approved by the institutional review board of Northwestern University. All participants provided written informed consent.
Patient Selection
Patients were recruited from a dermatology practice at Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, and the surrounding community. Inclusion criteria consisted of age 18 to 65 years, good health, Fitzpatrick skin types I to III, and a diagnosis of KP on both upper extremities. We excluded patients who had received any laser therapy to the arms in the 12 months before recruitment, with a concurrent diagnosis of another skin condition or malignant neoplasm, with a tan or sunburn over the upper arms in the month before recruitment, with open ulcers or infections at any skin site, or who were using topical or oral photosensitizing medications.
Study Procedures
When potential participants called or e-mailed the clinic for possible inclusion in the study, they underwent prescreening (performed by O.I.) over the telephone using the aforementioned inclusion and exclusion criteria. Once enrollment criteria were met, patients were scheduled for a total of 4 visits, 4 to 5 weeks apart, in the Department of Dermatology, Feinberg School of Medicine.
On the patient’s first visit, one of us (O.I.) reviewed the inclusion and exclusion criteria. After the patients provided written informed consent, they separately rated redness and roughness/bumpiness on each arm using a scale of 0 (least severe) to 3 (most severe) for a total maximum score of 6 per patient per arm. Next, patients were randomized into 2 groups as described below, and baseline standardized digital photographs were obtained. Each patient received treatment using the 810-nm pulsed diode laser to the arm randomized to be the treatment site. After laser treatment, both sides were treated with topical petrolatum. Treatments were repeated twice for a total of 3 treatment visits, with visits spaced 4 to 5 weeks apart. At the fourth and final visit, 12 to 15 weeks after the initial visit, the patients again rated disease severity as previously described. At this last visit, 2 blinded dermatologists (S.Y. and M.A.) also rated the roughness/bumpiness and redness of the treatment and control arms separately using the same scales, and digital photographs were again obtained.
Patient Randomization
Patient screening and enrollment were performed by one of us (M.D.), as were random sequence generation and concealment (R.K.), which were conducted by coin toss of the same fair coin, with the outcomes (1 or 2) recorded separately on individual paper cards then placed in sealed, opaque, consecutively numbered envelopes. Each patient was assigned to one of 2 groups (by W.D.). Patients in group 1 were designated to receive laser therapy on the right arm, and those in group 2 were assigned to receive laser therapy on the left arm. All study treatments were delivered by the same clinician (D.B.).
Laser Treatments
All study treatments used the 810-nm pulsed diode laser. A lidocaine and prilocaine–based cream was applied to the arms 30 to 60 minutes before treatment and washed off before treatment. Laser therapy was performed on the treatment side at a fluence of 45 to 60 J/cm2 (to convert to gray, multiply by 1) (depending on Fitzpatrick skin type) and a pulse duration of 30 to 100 milliseconds, with precise settings selected to be just below the patient’s threshold for purpura. Each treatment session entailed 2 nonoverlapping passes separated by a 1-minute delay. The patient was then instructed to minimize sun exposure and apply sunscreen with a sun protection factor of 50 to the treatment area daily until the next visit.
Outcome Measures
The primary outcome measure was the difference in disease severity score, including redness and roughness/bumpiness, between the treated site and the control site as rated by the blinded dermatologists at 12 weeks after the initial visit. This scale was not validated because no relevant validated scale was available. However, raters were trained on the use of the study scale, and before the review of study images, they were asked to rate archival skin images on the same 4-point qualitative subscales used in the study. Raters reviewed and rated archival images separately and then reconciled their ratings through face-to-face forced agreement, with the process repeated until concordance was achieved between raters and their separately rated scores were consistently equivalent.
During the evaluation of study data, forced agreement was used to reconcile blinded ratings. The secondary outcome measure was the change from baseline in disease severity of each arm as rated by the patients.
Power Analysis and Sample Size
Assuming an SD of change of 0.84, a sample of 20 patients had 80% power to detect median differences (or median changes) in severity scores of 0.5. We assumed a 2-sided test and type I error rate of 5%.
Statistical Analysis
We used the Wilcoxon signed rank test to compare the magnitude of change from baseline between treatment and control for all patient ratings (redness, roughness/bumpiness, and overall score). Blinded dermatologists’ ratings of the treatment and control sides were also compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test.
Results
Patient Baseline Demographic Characteristics
The study was conducted during a 7-month period from March 1 to October 1, 2011. A total of 26 patients underwent screening for our study, and 23 of those patients (46 arms) met our criteria and were enrolled in the study. Of these 23 patients, 18 (36 arms) completed the study and underwent analysis, 3 were lost to or unavailable for follow-up, and 2 voluntarily withdrew owing to inflammatory hyperpigmentation after the laser treatment. The demographic characteristics of our patients are presented in the Table. At baseline, patients rated the severity of the roughness/bumpiness in the texture of their arm test sites at a median score of 1.5 (interquarile range [IQR], 1-2) and the severity of the erythema of their arm test sites at a median score of 2.0 (IQR, 1-2). (The maximum score for both ratings was 3.0.)
Blinded Raters’ Scores
At follow-up, the median redness score assigned by the blinded raters for the treatment and control sides was 2.0 (IQR, 1-2), a null difference (Figure 1). The median roughness/bumpiness score was 1.0 (IQR, 1-2) for the treatment sides and 2.0 (IQR, 1-2) for the control sides, a difference of 1 (P = .004) (Figure 1). The median overall score combining erythema and roughness/bumpiness was 3.0 (IQR, 2-4) for the treatment sides and 4.0 (IQR, 3-5) for the control sides, a difference of 1 (P = .005) (Figure 1).
Patient Self-assessment Scores
At follow-up, patients’ self-reported median erythema rating for the control sides did not change from the baseline score of 2.0 (IQR, 1-2), but the self-reported median erythema score for the treatment side decreased from 2.0 to 1.5 (IQR, 1-2), a nominal difference that was not statistically significant (P = .13) (Figure 2). The median roughness/bumpiness score for the control sides increased from 1.5 to 2.0 (IQR, 1-2) and for the treatment sides decreased from 1.5 to 1.0 (IQR, 1-2). The 1-point decrease in roughness/bumpiness in the treatment arm compared with the control arm was significant (P = .008) (Figure 2). The overall score (erythema and roughness/bumpiness) for the control sides increased from 3.5 to 4.0 (IQR, 3-4), and for the treatment arm decreased from 3.5 to 2.5 (IQR, 2-4), with the cumulative difference of 1.5 points being significant (P = .005) (Figure 2).
Adverse Events
We found no unexpected adverse events associated with laser treatment. Two participants developed inflammatory hyperpigmentation after laser treatment and chose to withdraw from the study. These patients were instructed to continue sun-protective measures to their affected extremities, and in both cases hyperpigmentation completely resolved within 3 months.
Discussion
We investigated the effectiveness of the 810-nm diode laser in the treatment of KP. After 3 treatments spaced 4 to 5 weeks apart, blinded dermatologist ratings and patient self-report indicated significant improvements in skin texture and roughness/bumpiness when compared with baseline However, neither raters nor patients detected a significant change in erythema.
Most topical treatments for KP, including emollients, corticosteroids, and retinoids, are of limited effectiveness.9 Light-based treatments have typically entailed use of vascular lasers, like the application of a 532-nm potassium titanyl phosphate laser to treat a case of resistant facial KP by Dawn et al.5 Repeated treatments resulted in a marked improvement in erythema and some clearance of papules. A study of 12 patients using the 585-nm pulsed-dye laser6 found improvement in erythema but not in roughness/bumpiness. A similar report7 described a case in which multiple treatments with a 595-nm pulsed-dye laser induced marked improvements in facial erythema, patient satisfaction, and quality of life. A study of 10 patients treated with a 595-nm pulsed-dye laser8 confirmed these results.
To our knowledge, our study is the first of its kind to investigate the use of a longer-wavelength laser, the diode laser, in the treatment of KP. More important, our results are the first from a clinical trial that demonstrate the effectiveness of laser treatment of the textural abnormality and roughness/bumpiness associated with KP. The data from our investigation suggest that the 810-nm diode laser is a particularly promising and effective treatment for the nonerythematous variants of KP. The variant of KP known as keratosis pilaris alba, which presents mostly as follicular papules, may be highly responsive to this laser modality.10 The variant that includes perifollicular erythema with follicular papules, keratosis pilaris rubra,9,10 may best respond to joint treatment with diode and vascular lasers, with the former improving texture and the latter addressing erythema.
We have theoretical reasons for selecting the 810-nm diode laser and the settings used in this study. Specifically, KP is an inflammatory condition of vellus hair follicles. Compared with terminal hair, vellus hair is relatively deficient in melanin (ie, has less chromophore) and smaller in diameter (ie, has shorter thermal relaxation time). Based on the theory of selective photothermolysis, these features would be consistent with a thermal relaxation time of approximately 50 milliseconds, which means that a pulse duration of less than 50 milliseconds, such as the 30 milliseconds used in this study, would be appropriate for treatment. Because of a substantial lack of chromophore, the fluence required for photothermal destruction of a vellus hair follicle is 40 to 45 J/cm2, greater than that for a terminal hair. Ideally a highly absorbing wavelength such as 695 nm would be the best to treat vellus follicles, but this wavelength is absorbed by epidermal pigment in darker skinned individuals before it can reach deeper targets, such as the stem cells in the bulge region of the follicles. Similarly, 1064 nm is not highly selective for melanin, and we know that the vellus follicle has little melanin to begin with. As a consequence, the 810-nm wavelength appears to be the best choice because its depth of penetration is sufficient, it has selectivity for melanin, and it is compatible with a pulse duration of 30 milliseconds.
In terms of adverse events, our study found that treatment with the 810-nm diode laser was safe and not associated with any serious or unexpected adverse events. Although 2 patients (9%) developed bothersome inflammatory hyperpigmentation after laser treatment, resulting in their withdrawal from the study, these sequelae resolved completely in the medium term. Further counseling about the need for sun protection and avoidance of tanning during the period of laser treatment may mitigate the risk for posttreatment inflammatory hyperpigmentation in the future.
A limitation of our study is that enrollment was restricted to participants with Fitzpatrick skin types I to III. The exclusion of darker skin types was not incidental but rather designed to minimize the risk for posttreatment inflammatory hyperpigmentation, which is more common after laser procedures in patients with Fitzpatrick skin types IV to VI. That posttreatment inflammatory hyperpigmentation was observed in this study despite careful patient selection suggests that this precaution was appropriate. Regardless, patients with darker skin types can indeed be treated safely with the diode laser if gentle settings are used. Once this treatment paradigm is optimized, such broader application will likely be appropriate and feasible. One protective benefit of the current treatment settings was that they were deliberately below the threshold for purpura and thus designed to avoid bruising, which can resolve with tan pigmentation, particularly in darker skin. To the extent that the 810-nm diode laser has hair-removing activity, this treatment may be inappropriate for patients who do not want hair loss at the site of their KP. Finally, although incidental reports from some participants previously in this study have indicated that they have maintained textural benefits for more than a year, it remains to be seen to what extent these improvements are maintained over the longer term. To the extent that laser treatment may significantly modify hair growth in abnormal vellus hair follicles initially induced by genetic predisposition, improvement may be long lasting. This result would then be parallel to the case of traditional hair removal, in which posttreatment long-term remission of coarse terminal hairs and the corresponding pseudofolliculitis is often observed.
However, this study was not designed to assess long-term improvement, and additional studies would need to be performed to systematically measure the duration and likelihood of persistent benefits. The present study only provides proof of concept and indicates that improvement of the textural abnormalities associated with KP is possible after treatment with an 810-nm diode laser.
Conclusions
By objective and subjective measures, we found that, among lighter-skinned persons, serial treatment with a long-pulsed 810-nm diode laser at subpurpuric levels provided medium-term improvement in KP, particularly for the associated roughness/bumpiness and textural irregularity. Combined with preexisting data about the utility of vascular lasers for the reduction of KP-associated erythema, this finding suggests that laser treatment may comprehensively address the clinical manifestations of KP in selected patients. Future studies may assess the durability of these responses and the comparative effectiveness of different long-wavelength lasers.
Ipl Or Microneedling For Large Pores
IPL therapy is a more selective treatment compared to microneedling. It also brings faster results that last longer when compared to microneedling. However, it’s not as effective in smoothing skin texture or promoting collagen production. If wrinkle reduction is your top priority, microneedling is better than IPL.
When selecting a skin resurfacing treatment, you may find yourself deciding between microneedling with Platelet Rich Plasma (PRP) or trying out an Intense Pulsed Light (IPL) photofacial.
Both treatments yield a lot of great benefits and address a variety of cosmetic concerns. You can expect a clearer complexion, more radiant skin, and an overall more youthful appearance. Both are non-surgical with no extensive downtime.
So, how do you know which is best for you?
Your provider can guide you in the right direction, but read on to see which treatment will better suit your unique needs.
The Primary Difference Between Microneedling and IPL Photofacial
The main difference between these two treatments is how they work.
Microneedling involves using a device that rolls very fine needles over your skin. This creates thousands of tiny punctures all over the treatment area. Creating these micro injuries triggers your body’s natural healing process to kick in. This increases the production of collagen – an essential protein that keeps your skin tight, firm, and youthful.
Adding PRP to your microneedling treatment includes drawing your blood, spinning it in a centrifuge and separating out the platelets, which are then applied to your skin prior to using the microneedling device. Platelets are rich in growth factors, helping speed the healing process and optimizing your results.
An IPL photofacial harnesses the power of a laser to specifically target pigment in the skin. The laser passes through the top layer of skin and generates heat. The heat selectively damages red and brown pigmented areas – without damaging the surrounding tissue. This also triggers your body to heal itself, creating more collagen.
Why Choose Microneedling?
Are skin texture issues your primary concern? Start with microneedling with PRP.
Microneedling is great for any textural concerns. Rough patches are mechanically removed by exfoliating the skin and encouraging cell turnover. With a boost in collagen production, wrinkles and fine lines are reduced.The treatment results in firmer, smoother, and more toned skin.
Microneedling helps smooth and tighten your skin by reducing the following problems:
- Wrinkles and fine lines
- Acne scarring
- Stretch marks
- Large pores
- Rough spots
The production of collagen starts with this treatment and lasts for months. This means the results improve over time, and are not as immediate as what you’d expect with IPL.
Overall, the results are more subtle, and you have a quicker recovery time and less chance for side effects.
Don’t really have specific skin concerns? Microneedling with PRP is a great proactive skin care strategy when compared to IPL. It rejuvenates a dull complexion and helps prevent the onset of wrinkles by encouraging your body’s ability to produce more collagen.
Why Choose IPL Photofacial?
If your primary need is to get rid of dark spots or visible blood vessels, an IPL photofacial is the treatment to start with. IPL targets any red and brown discoloration on the skin with a laser, breaking down and removing pigment from your body.
An IPL photofacial clears up your complexion by reducing the appearance of the following cosmetic concerns:
- Brown spots
- Red spots
- Freckles
- Birthmarks
- Rosacea
- Spider veins
- Broken capillaries
While microneedling also helps with some of these issues, overall pigmentation problems and blemishes are best treated by a laser. The laser works more quickly and efficiently to reduce the visibility of these cosmetic concerns.
The skin is the largest organ of the body, so it’s no surprise that skin imperfections, blemishes, marks and lesions can happen. Many skin conditions not harmful to your health, but can be a nuisance, unsightly or even embarrassing. Keratosis Pilaris is one such condition, and treating Keratosis Pilaris is simple.
It’s very common and completely harmless but if you suffer with it, can be something of a less than welcome part of your life, due to its sometimes, unattractive appearance. If you have small pimples on the skin that look like permanent goose bumps on areas of the body such as the back of your arms, legs, bottom and even the back, face, eyebrows and scalp, which sometimes get itchy or red, you may have Keratosis Pilaris.
The condition occurs when there is a build-up of a substance called Keratin, a natural protein, which in fact is the main component of the hair as well as healthy skin. This, excess Keratin blocks the openings of the hair follicles, which can cause the small red or white bumps to appear. Keratosis Pilaris also takes the name of “chicken skin” as the skin takes on this appearance. So, no wonder that many people who experience it would like to reduce oreven, eradicate the symptoms.
So, how are we treating Keratosis Pilaris?
Fortunately, at Skin Perfection London, we offer a choice of non-surgical solutions for treating Keratosis Pilaris, painlessly, safely and effectively, from the comfort of our clinic, which is based in the heart of London, between Oxford Street, Harley Street and Bond Street. Treatments can be used alone or combined, for a holistic approach to reducing the chicken skin appearance.
Laser hair removal is a superb way of treating Keratosis Pilaris at its cause. It’s safe, virtually painless and can be permanent! It works by emitting short pulses of light in to the hair follicle, causing it to stop growing hair and to close. This means that it can no longer be blocked by the Keratin and the condition can be drastically improved. The treatment may take up to 9 sessions for optimum results, but can be a long-term solution to this troublesome condition and far better than having to shave, wax or epilate the hair, which can be extremely painful and can exacerbate the symptoms. Laser hair removal is suitable for all skin types and you could see up to 95% permanent reduction in hair growth, so it’s a win-win!
Medical microdermabrasion could be another option. It works by resurfacing the skin and cleaning blocked and congested pores and offers very little downtime or discomfort. At Skin Perfection London, we use the Derma Genesis medical microdermabrasion system, which utilises tiny medical-grade aluminium oxide crystals, which are swept across the skin by a hand-held device. The crystals are then gently sucked back up, bringing with them dirt, debris and dead surface skin cells. This reveals a smoother, clearer and healthier complexion, less prone to becoming congested. Results can be seen after a course of several sessions and your skin expert will explain the treatment programme, along with expected results, at a no obligation consultation, prior to treatment.
Although a harmless condition, Keratosis Pilaris doesn’t have to be endured and at Skin Perfection London, we make it our mission to offer you the most effective, innovative and high-tech device-led treatments to restore smooth, healthy and sexy looking skin, all-year-round.