Article: “…of all the procedures, hair removal seemed to deliver best on its promise. The before and after photos presenters showed of vascular lesions – particularly the small broken blood vessels on the side of the nose and red birthmarks – also showed clear improvement”
Comment: I agree. These are mature laser technologies, and do work effectively.
Article: “Least impressive were results from laser-assisted body contouring and face and neck lifting. One practitioner on the body contour panel said that in only 20% of cases where a patient had the non-invasive Cool Sculpting procedure were both the doctor and the patient satisfied…”
Comment: I agree here too. It’s hard to beat a well-performed liposuction with either PAL or standard tumescent techniques, or a traditional surgical facelift. The laser-assisted liposuction devices are still evolving and changing every year. Manufacturers and surgeons can’t seem to agree on which wavelength, power and other parameters are the best for these fat-busting lasers – which tells you that they really don’t yet know. I’m surprised that the satisfaction number is only 20%. That’s really dismally low for laser liposuction.
Article: Discussing laser treatments of the face & neck, the report quotes Dr, Zelickson, a renowned laser researcher and developer of the Zeltiq, “In many cases, results are very modest; tightening is hard to measure.”
Comment: Truthful words from Dr. Z. That’s one reason why I don’t use Ulthera – the results are too darn subtle. I think patients want to see obvious visible improvements without having to scrutinize their before and after photos for minor improvements.
Article: “Patients need to do their homework and not go off a billboard”, said Dr. Geronemus.
Comment: Truer words were never spoken!
So even though a procedure with the word “laser” attached to it sounds all high-tech and cool, it’s not always the best choice. Be sure to check out the alternatives.