Aesthetic Dermatology

As we deal with the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, hand washing and the use of hand sanitizers have been key for infection prevention. With drier, colder weather in many of the communities initially affected by COVID-19, skin was already prone to dryness and a skin barrier compromised, and hand eczema was more prevalent because of these factors alone. This article explores the effects of hand washing and hand sanitizer on skin and how this prevents infection, and explores methods to promote skin health while maintaining the maximum possible degree of infection prevention.

With many viruses, including coronavirus, the virus is a self-assembled nanoparticle in which the most vulnerable structure is the outer lipid bilayer. Soaps dissolve the lipid membrane and the virus breaks apart, inactivating it; they are also alkaline surfactants that pick up particles – including dirt, bacteria, and viruses – which are removed from the surface of the skin when the soaps are rinsed off. In the process of washing, the alkalinity of the soap (pH approximately 9-10), compared with the normal outer skin pH of approximately 5.5 or lower, also can affect the skin barrier as well as the resident skin microflora. In a study by Lambers et al., it was found that an acid skin pH (4-4.5) keeps the resident bacterial flora attached to the skin, whereas an alkaline pH (8-9) promotes the dispersal from the skin in assessments of the volar forearm.

With regard to the effectiveness of hand washing against viruses, the length of time spent hand washing has been shown to have an impact on influenza-like illness. In a recent study of 2,082 participants by Bin Abdulrahman et al., those who spent only 5-10 seconds hand washing with soap and hand rubbing were at a higher risk of more frequent influenza-like illness (odds ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.75), compared with those who washed their hands for 15 seconds or longer. Moreover, hand washing with soap and rubbing after shaking hands was found to be an independent protective factor against frequent influenza-like illness (adjusted OR, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.94). Previous studies on the impact of hand washing on bacterial and parasitic illnesses also found similar results: Hand washing for 15-20 seconds or longer reduces infection.

Alcohol, long known as a disinfectant, has been recommended for disinfecting the hands since the late 1800s. Most alcohol-based hand antiseptics contain isopropanol, ethanol, N-propanol, or a combination of two of these products. The antimicrobial activity of alcohols can be attributed to their ability to denature and coagulate proteins, thereby lysing microorganisms’ cells, and disrupting their cellular metabolism. Alcohol solutions containing 60%-95% alcohol are the most effective. Notably, very high concentrations of alcohol are less potent because less water is found in higher concentrations of alcohol and proteins are not denatured easily in the absence of water. Alcohol-based hand sanitizers also often contain humectants, such as glycerin and/or aloe vera, to help prevent skin dryness and replace water content that is stripped by the use of alcohol on the skin surface.

In the case of SARS, treatment of SARS-CoV with povidone-iodine products for 2 minutes reduced virus infectivity to below the detectable level, equivalent to the effect of ethanol, in one study. Formalin fixation of the infected cells and heating the virus to 56° C, as used in routine tissue processing, were found to inactivate several coronaviruses as well. Based on this information, ethanol-based hand sanitizers, typically containing ethanol content of 60% or higher, can be used to inactivate coronaviruses on the skin, including COVID-19.

In patients with influenza-virus infections, whether pathogens were in wet or dried mucus played a role in whether hand washing or rubbing with hand sanitizer was more effective. In a study that examined the effects of hand washing versus antiseptic hand rubbing with an ethanol-based hand disinfectant on inactivation of influenza A virus adhered to the hands, the investigators showed that the effectiveness of the ethanol-based disinfectant against influenza A virus in mucus was reduced, compared with influenza A virus in saline. Influenza A in mucus remained active, despite 120 seconds of hand rubbing with hand sanitizer; however, influenza A in saline was completely inactivated within 30 seconds. Interestingly, rubbing hands with an ethanol-based disinfectant inactivated influenza A virus in mucus within 30 seconds with mucus that had dried completely because the hydrogel characteristics had been eliminated. Hand washing rapidly inactivated influenza A virus whether in mucus form, saline, or dried mucous.

It is important to note that in COVID-19 infections, a productive cough or rhinorrhea are not as common compared with dry cough. Regardless, the findings of the study described above should be considered if mucous symptoms develop during a COVID-19 infection when determining infection control. Luckily, with COVID-19, both hand washing and use of an ethanol-based hand sanitizer are seemingly effective in inactivating the virus or removing it from the skin surface.

After frequent hand washing, we all can experience dryness and potentially cracked skin as well. With hand sanitizer, the alcohol content can also cause burning of skin, especially compromised skin.

Vanilloid receptor-1 (VR1), a heat-gated ion channel, is responsible for the burning sensation caused by capsaicin. Ethanol lowers the amount of heat needed to turn on VR1 nocioceptive pain receptors by almost ten degrees, resulting in a potential burning sensation when applied.

Nails are affected as well with frequent hand washing and/or application of hand sanitizer and can become cracked or brittle. Contact dermatitis, both irritant and allergic, can occur with increased use of disinfectants, particularly household cleaners without proper barrier protection.

Dr. Wesley and Dr. Talakoub are cocontributors to this column. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. This month’s column is by Dr. Wesley. They had no relevant disclosures. Write to them at [email protected].
 

Resources

Lambers H et al. Int J Cosmet Sci. 2006 Oct;28(5):359-70.

Bin Abdulrahman AK et al. BMC Public Health. 2019 Oct 22;19(1):1324. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-77.

Kariwa H et al. Dermatology. 2006;212 Suppl 1:119-23.

HIrose R et al. mSphere. 2019 Sep 18;4(5). pii: e00474-19. doi: 10.1128/mSphere.00474-19.

Trevisani M et al. Nat Neurosci. 2002 Jun;5(6):546-51.

Yan Y et al. Dermatol Ther. 2020 Mar 13:e13310. doi: 10.1111/dth.13310.

As we deal with the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, hand washing and the use of hand sanitizers have been key for infection prevention. With drier, colder weather in many of the communities initially affected by COVID-19, skin was already prone to dryness and a skin barrier compromised, and hand eczema was more prevalent because of these factors alone. This article explores the effects of hand washing and hand sanitizer on skin and how this prevents infection, and explores methods to promote skin health while maintaining the maximum possible degree of infection prevention.

With many viruses, including coronavirus, the virus is a self-assembled nanoparticle in which the most vulnerable structure is the outer lipid bilayer. Soaps dissolve the lipid membrane and the virus breaks apart, inactivating it; they are also alkaline surfactants that pick up particles – including dirt, bacteria, and viruses – which are removed from the surface of the skin when the soaps are rinsed off. In the process of washing, the alkalinity of the soap (pH approximately 9-10), compared with the normal outer skin pH of approximately 5.5 or lower, also can affect the skin barrier as well as the resident skin microflora. In a study by Lambers et al., it was found that an acid skin pH (4-4.5) keeps the resident bacterial flora attached to the skin, whereas an alkaline pH (8-9) promotes the dispersal from the skin in assessments of the volar forearm.

With regard to the effectiveness of hand washing against viruses, the length of time spent hand washing has been shown to have an impact on influenza-like illness. In a recent study of 2,082 participants by Bin Abdulrahman et al., those who spent only 5-10 seconds hand washing with soap and hand rubbing were at a higher risk of more frequent influenza-like illness (odds ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.75), compared with those who washed their hands for 15 seconds or longer. Moreover, hand washing with soap and rubbing after shaking hands was found to be an independent protective factor against frequent influenza-like illness (adjusted OR, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.94). Previous studies on the impact of hand washing on bacterial and parasitic illnesses also found similar results: Hand washing for 15-20 seconds or longer reduces infection.

Alcohol, long known as a disinfectant, has been recommended for disinfecting the hands since the late 1800s. Most alcohol-based hand antiseptics contain isopropanol, ethanol, N-propanol, or a combination of two of these products. The antimicrobial activity of alcohols can be attributed to their ability to denature and coagulate proteins, thereby lysing microorganisms’ cells, and disrupting their cellular metabolism. Alcohol solutions containing 60%-95% alcohol are the most effective. Notably, very high concentrations of alcohol are less potent because less water is found in higher concentrations of alcohol and proteins are not denatured easily in the absence of water. Alcohol-based hand sanitizers also often contain humectants, such as glycerin and/or aloe vera, to help prevent skin dryness and replace water content that is stripped by the use of alcohol on the skin surface.

In the case of SARS, treatment of SARS-CoV with povidone-iodine products for 2 minutes reduced virus infectivity to below the detectable level, equivalent to the effect of ethanol, in one study. Formalin fixation of the infected cells and heating the virus to 56° C, as used in routine tissue processing, were found to inactivate several coronaviruses as well. Based on this information, ethanol-based hand sanitizers, typically containing ethanol content of 60% or higher, can be used to inactivate coronaviruses on the skin, including COVID-19.

In patients with influenza-virus infections, whether pathogens were in wet or dried mucus played a role in whether hand washing or rubbing with hand sanitizer was more effective. In a study that examined the effects of hand washing versus antiseptic hand rubbing with an ethanol-based hand disinfectant on inactivation of influenza A virus adhered to the hands, the investigators showed that the effectiveness of the ethanol-based disinfectant against influenza A virus in mucus was reduced, compared with influenza A virus in saline. Influenza A in mucus remained active, despite 120 seconds of hand rubbing with hand sanitizer; however, influenza A in saline was completely inactivated within 30 seconds. Interestingly, rubbing hands with an ethanol-based disinfectant inactivated influenza A virus in mucus within 30 seconds with mucus that had dried completely because the hydrogel characteristics had been eliminated. Hand washing rapidly inactivated influenza A virus whether in mucus form, saline, or dried mucous.

It is important to note that in COVID-19 infections, a productive cough or rhinorrhea are not as common compared with dry cough. Regardless, the findings of the study described above should be considered if mucous symptoms develop during a COVID-19 infection when determining infection control. Luckily, with COVID-19, both hand washing and use of an ethanol-based hand sanitizer are seemingly effective in inactivating the virus or removing it from the skin surface.

After frequent hand washing, we all can experience dryness and potentially cracked skin as well. With hand sanitizer, the alcohol content can also cause burning of skin, especially compromised skin.

Vanilloid receptor-1 (VR1), a heat-gated ion channel, is responsible for the burning sensation caused by capsaicin. Ethanol lowers the amount of heat needed to turn on VR1 nocioceptive pain receptors by almost ten degrees, resulting in a potential burning sensation when applied.

Nails are affected as well with frequent hand washing and/or application of hand sanitizer and can become cracked or brittle. Contact dermatitis, both irritant and allergic, can occur with increased use of disinfectants, particularly household cleaners without proper barrier protection.

Dr. Wesley and Dr. Talakoub are cocontributors to this column. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. This month’s column is by Dr. Wesley. They had no relevant disclosures. Write to them at [email protected].
 

Resources

Lambers H et al. Int J Cosmet Sci. 2006 Oct;28(5):359-70.

Bin Abdulrahman AK et al. BMC Public Health. 2019 Oct 22;19(1):1324. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-77.

Kariwa H et al. Dermatology. 2006;212 Suppl 1:119-23.

HIrose R et al. mSphere. 2019 Sep 18;4(5). pii: e00474-19. doi: 10.1128/mSphere.00474-19.

Trevisani M et al. Nat Neurosci. 2002 Jun;5(6):546-51.

Yan Y et al. Dermatol Ther. 2020 Mar 13:e13310. doi: 10.1111/dth.13310.

As we deal with the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, hand washing and the use of hand sanitizers have been key for infection prevention. With drier, colder weather in many of the communities initially affected by COVID-19, skin was already prone to dryness and a skin barrier compromised, and hand eczema was more prevalent because of these factors alone. This article explores the effects of hand washing and hand sanitizer on skin and how this prevents infection, and explores methods to promote skin health while maintaining the maximum possible degree of infection prevention.

With many viruses, including coronavirus, the virus is a self-assembled nanoparticle in which the most vulnerable structure is the outer lipid bilayer. Soaps dissolve the lipid membrane and the virus breaks apart, inactivating it; they are also alkaline surfactants that pick up particles – including dirt, bacteria, and viruses – which are removed from the surface of the skin when the soaps are rinsed off. In the process of washing, the alkalinity of the soap (pH approximately 9-10), compared with the normal outer skin pH of approximately 5.5 or lower, also can affect the skin barrier as well as the resident skin microflora. In a study by Lambers et al., it was found that an acid skin pH (4-4.5) keeps the resident bacterial flora attached to the skin, whereas an alkaline pH (8-9) promotes the dispersal from the skin in assessments of the volar forearm.

With regard to the effectiveness of hand washing against viruses, the length of time spent hand washing has been shown to have an impact on influenza-like illness. In a recent study of 2,082 participants by Bin Abdulrahman et al., those who spent only 5-10 seconds hand washing with soap and hand rubbing were at a higher risk of more frequent influenza-like illness (odds ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.75), compared with those who washed their hands for 15 seconds or longer. Moreover, hand washing with soap and rubbing after shaking hands was found to be an independent protective factor against frequent influenza-like illness (adjusted OR, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.94). Previous studies on the impact of hand washing on bacterial and parasitic illnesses also found similar results: Hand washing for 15-20 seconds or longer reduces infection.

Alcohol, long known as a disinfectant, has been recommended for disinfecting the hands since the late 1800s. Most alcohol-based hand antiseptics contain isopropanol, ethanol, N-propanol, or a combination of two of these products. The antimicrobial activity of alcohols can be attributed to their ability to denature and coagulate proteins, thereby lysing microorganisms’ cells, and disrupting their cellular metabolism. Alcohol solutions containing 60%-95% alcohol are the most effective. Notably, very high concentrations of alcohol are less potent because less water is found in higher concentrations of alcohol and proteins are not denatured easily in the absence of water. Alcohol-based hand sanitizers also often contain humectants, such as glycerin and/or aloe vera, to help prevent skin dryness and replace water content that is stripped by the use of alcohol on the skin surface.

In the case of SARS, treatment of SARS-CoV with povidone-iodine products for 2 minutes reduced virus infectivity to below the detectable level, equivalent to the effect of ethanol, in one study. Formalin fixation of the infected cells and heating the virus to 56° C, as used in routine tissue processing, were found to inactivate several coronaviruses as well. Based on this information, ethanol-based hand sanitizers, typically containing ethanol content of 60% or higher, can be used to inactivate coronaviruses on the skin, including COVID-19.

In patients with influenza-virus infections, whether pathogens were in wet or dried mucus played a role in whether hand washing or rubbing with hand sanitizer was more effective. In a study that examined the effects of hand washing versus antiseptic hand rubbing with an ethanol-based hand disinfectant on inactivation of influenza A virus adhered to the hands, the investigators showed that the effectiveness of the ethanol-based disinfectant against influenza A virus in mucus was reduced, compared with influenza A virus in saline. Influenza A in mucus remained active, despite 120 seconds of hand rubbing with hand sanitizer; however, influenza A in saline was completely inactivated within 30 seconds. Interestingly, rubbing hands with an ethanol-based disinfectant inactivated influenza A virus in mucus within 30 seconds with mucus that had dried completely because the hydrogel characteristics had been eliminated. Hand washing rapidly inactivated influenza A virus whether in mucus form, saline, or dried mucous.

It is important to note that in COVID-19 infections, a productive cough or rhinorrhea are not as common compared with dry cough. Regardless, the findings of the study described above should be considered if mucous symptoms develop during a COVID-19 infection when determining infection control. Luckily, with COVID-19, both hand washing and use of an ethanol-based hand sanitizer are seemingly effective in inactivating the virus or removing it from the skin surface.

After frequent hand washing, we all can experience dryness and potentially cracked skin as well. With hand sanitizer, the alcohol content can also cause burning of skin, especially compromised skin.

Vanilloid receptor-1 (VR1), a heat-gated ion channel, is responsible for the burning sensation caused by capsaicin. Ethanol lowers the amount of heat needed to turn on VR1 nocioceptive pain receptors by almost ten degrees, resulting in a potential burning sensation when applied.

Nails are affected as well with frequent hand washing and/or application of hand sanitizer and can become cracked or brittle. Contact dermatitis, both irritant and allergic, can occur with increased use of disinfectants, particularly household cleaners without proper barrier protection.

Dr. Wesley and Dr. Talakoub are cocontributors to this column. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. This month’s column is by Dr. Wesley. They had no relevant disclosures. Write to them at [email protected].
 

Resources

Lambers H et al. Int J Cosmet Sci. 2006 Oct;28(5):359-70.

Bin Abdulrahman AK et al. BMC Public Health. 2019 Oct 22;19(1):1324. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-77.

Kariwa H et al. Dermatology. 2006;212 Suppl 1:119-23.

HIrose R et al. mSphere. 2019 Sep 18;4(5). pii: e00474-19. doi: 10.1128/mSphere.00474-19.

Trevisani M et al. Nat Neurosci. 2002 Jun;5(6):546-51.

Yan Y et al. Dermatol Ther. 2020 Mar 13:e13310. doi: 10.1111/dth.13310.

To the Editor:

Mesotherapy, also known as intradermotherapy, is a cosmetic procedure in which multiple intradermal or subcutaneous injections of homeopathic substances, vitamins, chemicals, and plant extracts are administered.¹ First conceived in Europe, mesotherapy is not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration but is gaining popularity in the United States as an alternative cosmetic procedure for various purposes, including lipolysis, body contouring, stretch marks, acne scars, actinic damage, and skin rejuvenation.^1,2 We report a case of a healthy woman who developed perifolliculitis, transaminitis, and neutropenia 2 weeks after mesotherapy administration to the face, neck, and chest. We also review other potential side effects of this procedure.

A 36-year-old woman with no notable medical history presented to the emergency department with a worsening pruritic and painful rash on the face, chest, and neck of 2 weeks’ duration. The rash had developed 3 days after the patient received mesotherapy with an unknown substance for cosmetic rejuvenation; the rash was localized only to the injection sites. She did not note any fever, chills, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, headache, arthralgia, or upper respiratory tract symptoms. She further denied starting any new medications, herbal products, or topical therapies apart from the procedure she had received 2 weeks prior.

The patient was found to be in no acute distress and vital signs were stable. Laboratory testing was remarkable for elevations in alanine aminotransferase (62 U/L [reference range, 10–40 U/L]) and aspartate aminotransferase (72 U/L [reference range 10–30 U/L]). Moreover, she had an absolute neutrophil count of 0.5×10³ cells/µL (reference range 1.8–8.0×10³ cells/µL). An electrolyte panel, creatinine level, and urinalysis were normal. Physical examination revealed numerous 4- to 5-mm erythematous papules in a gridlike distribution across the face, neck, and chest (Figure 1). No pustules or nodules were present. There was no discharge, crust, excoriations, or secondary lesions. Additionally, there was no lymphadenopathy and no mucous membrane or ocular involvement.

Mesotherapy promises aesthetic benefits through a minimally invasive procedure and therefore is rapidly gaining popularity in aesthetic spas and treatment centers. Due to the lack of regulation in treatment protocols and substances used, there have been numerous reported cases of adverse side effects following mesotherapy, such as pain, allergic reactions, urticaria, panniculitis, ulceration, hair loss, necrosis, paraffinoma, cutaneous tuberculosis, and rapidly growing nontuberculous mycobacterial infections.^1-5 More serious side effects also have been reported, such as permanent scarring, deformities, delirium, and massive subcutaneous emphysema (Table).^2,4-18

To the Editor:

Mesotherapy, also known as intradermotherapy, is a cosmetic procedure in which multiple intradermal or subcutaneous injections of homeopathic substances, vitamins, chemicals, and plant extracts are administered.¹ First conceived in Europe, mesotherapy is not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration but is gaining popularity in the United States as an alternative cosmetic procedure for various purposes, including lipolysis, body contouring, stretch marks, acne scars, actinic damage, and skin rejuvenation.^1,2 We report a case of a healthy woman who developed perifolliculitis, transaminitis, and neutropenia 2 weeks after mesotherapy administration to the face, neck, and chest. We also review other potential side effects of this procedure.

A 36-year-old woman with no notable medical history presented to the emergency department with a worsening pruritic and painful rash on the face, chest, and neck of 2 weeks’ duration. The rash had developed 3 days after the patient received mesotherapy with an unknown substance for cosmetic rejuvenation; the rash was localized only to the injection sites. She did not note any fever, chills, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, headache, arthralgia, or upper respiratory tract symptoms. She further denied starting any new medications, herbal products, or topical therapies apart from the procedure she had received 2 weeks prior.

The patient was found to be in no acute distress and vital signs were stable. Laboratory testing was remarkable for elevations in alanine aminotransferase (62 U/L [reference range, 10–40 U/L]) and aspartate aminotransferase (72 U/L [reference range 10–30 U/L]). Moreover, she had an absolute neutrophil count of 0.5×10³ cells/µL (reference range 1.8–8.0×10³ cells/µL). An electrolyte panel, creatinine level, and urinalysis were normal. Physical examination revealed numerous 4- to 5-mm erythematous papules in a gridlike distribution across the face, neck, and chest (Figure 1). No pustules or nodules were present. There was no discharge, crust, excoriations, or secondary lesions. Additionally, there was no lymphadenopathy and no mucous membrane or ocular involvement.

Mesotherapy promises aesthetic benefits through a minimally invasive procedure and therefore is rapidly gaining popularity in aesthetic spas and treatment centers. Due to the lack of regulation in treatment protocols and substances used, there have been numerous reported cases of adverse side effects following mesotherapy, such as pain, allergic reactions, urticaria, panniculitis, ulceration, hair loss, necrosis, paraffinoma, cutaneous tuberculosis, and rapidly growing nontuberculous mycobacterial infections.^1-5 More serious side effects also have been reported, such as permanent scarring, deformities, delirium, and massive subcutaneous emphysema (Table).^2,4-18

To the Editor:

Mesotherapy, also known as intradermotherapy, is a cosmetic procedure in which multiple intradermal or subcutaneous injections of homeopathic substances, vitamins, chemicals, and plant extracts are administered.¹ First conceived in Europe, mesotherapy is not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration but is gaining popularity in the United States as an alternative cosmetic procedure for various purposes, including lipolysis, body contouring, stretch marks, acne scars, actinic damage, and skin rejuvenation.^1,2 We report a case of a healthy woman who developed perifolliculitis, transaminitis, and neutropenia 2 weeks after mesotherapy administration to the face, neck, and chest. We also review other potential side effects of this procedure.

A 36-year-old woman with no notable medical history presented to the emergency department with a worsening pruritic and painful rash on the face, chest, and neck of 2 weeks’ duration. The rash had developed 3 days after the patient received mesotherapy with an unknown substance for cosmetic rejuvenation; the rash was localized only to the injection sites. She did not note any fever, chills, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, headache, arthralgia, or upper respiratory tract symptoms. She further denied starting any new medications, herbal products, or topical therapies apart from the procedure she had received 2 weeks prior.

The patient was found to be in no acute distress and vital signs were stable. Laboratory testing was remarkable for elevations in alanine aminotransferase (62 U/L [reference range, 10–40 U/L]) and aspartate aminotransferase (72 U/L [reference range 10–30 U/L]). Moreover, she had an absolute neutrophil count of 0.5×10³ cells/µL (reference range 1.8–8.0×10³ cells/µL). An electrolyte panel, creatinine level, and urinalysis were normal. Physical examination revealed numerous 4- to 5-mm erythematous papules in a gridlike distribution across the face, neck, and chest (Figure 1). No pustules or nodules were present. There was no discharge, crust, excoriations, or secondary lesions. Additionally, there was no lymphadenopathy and no mucous membrane or ocular involvement.

Mesotherapy promises aesthetic benefits through a minimally invasive procedure and therefore is rapidly gaining popularity in aesthetic spas and treatment centers. Due to the lack of regulation in treatment protocols and substances used, there have been numerous reported cases of adverse side effects following mesotherapy, such as pain, allergic reactions, urticaria, panniculitis, ulceration, hair loss, necrosis, paraffinoma, cutaneous tuberculosis, and rapidly growing nontuberculous mycobacterial infections.^1-5 More serious side effects also have been reported, such as permanent scarring, deformities, delirium, and massive subcutaneous emphysema (Table).^2,4-18

LAHAINA, HAWAII – “Protect and prevent” by applying an antioxidant and sunscreen in the morning, and focus on repair using a retinoid in the evening. That’s the simple message about daily skin care that clinicians can offer patients, according to Brooke Sikora, MD.

“At a very basic level, you want to tell your patients [to] use an antioxidant and use your sunscreen” early in the day, said Dr. Sikora, who is in private practice in Chestnut Hill, Mass. “In the evening, it’s all about repairing their damage, so make sure they’re getting on a retinol,” and if they can’t tolerate prescription strength, try a nonprescription product, she noted at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

“Aging factors create oxidative stress on the skin that leads to the development of these reactive oxygen species on the skin,” decreasing collagen production and increasing collagen breakdown, she explained during a presentation on cosmeceuticals at the meeting. Applying an antioxidant to the skin, however, can help neutralize “a lot of these reactive oxygen species and help to slow the breakdown of collagen.”

There is good evidence that peptides and growth factors – although expensive – work well and are worth recommending for patients “who really want to take their skin care to the next level,” Dr. Sikora said. “Then you can add corrective products like hyperpigmentation or acne products to treat ... specific concerns” as needed.

In an interview at the meeting, Dr. Sikora discussed these recommendations, as well as vitamin C use in the daily skin care routine. (To listen to the interview, click on the play button below.)

Vitamin C is the best-studied antioxidant, she noted during her presentation, and in vivo studies have shown it can stimulate collagen synthesis, reduce erythema of rosacea (which is why she has all her rosacea patients on vitamin C), reduce post-UVB erythema, decrease facial wrinkles, and increase dermal papillae.

Dr. Sikora disclosed that she is a consultant to and on the advisory board of SkinCeuticals, La Roche–Posay, Silk Therapeutics, Galderma, Evolus, and Allergen. She is on the speakers bureau for SkinCeuticals, La Roche–Posay, Galderma, and Aclaris.

SDEF/Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

To listen to the interview, click on the play button below.

[email protected]

LAHAINA, HAWAII – “Protect and prevent” by applying an antioxidant and sunscreen in the morning, and focus on repair using a retinoid in the evening. That’s the simple message about daily skin care that clinicians can offer patients, according to Brooke Sikora, MD.

“At a very basic level, you want to tell your patients [to] use an antioxidant and use your sunscreen” early in the day, said Dr. Sikora, who is in private practice in Chestnut Hill, Mass. “In the evening, it’s all about repairing their damage, so make sure they’re getting on a retinol,” and if they can’t tolerate prescription strength, try a nonprescription product, she noted at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

“Aging factors create oxidative stress on the skin that leads to the development of these reactive oxygen species on the skin,” decreasing collagen production and increasing collagen breakdown, she explained during a presentation on cosmeceuticals at the meeting. Applying an antioxidant to the skin, however, can help neutralize “a lot of these reactive oxygen species and help to slow the breakdown of collagen.”

There is good evidence that peptides and growth factors – although expensive – work well and are worth recommending for patients “who really want to take their skin care to the next level,” Dr. Sikora said. “Then you can add corrective products like hyperpigmentation or acne products to treat ... specific concerns” as needed.

In an interview at the meeting, Dr. Sikora discussed these recommendations, as well as vitamin C use in the daily skin care routine. (To listen to the interview, click on the play button below.)

Vitamin C is the best-studied antioxidant, she noted during her presentation, and in vivo studies have shown it can stimulate collagen synthesis, reduce erythema of rosacea (which is why she has all her rosacea patients on vitamin C), reduce post-UVB erythema, decrease facial wrinkles, and increase dermal papillae.

Dr. Sikora disclosed that she is a consultant to and on the advisory board of SkinCeuticals, La Roche–Posay, Silk Therapeutics, Galderma, Evolus, and Allergen. She is on the speakers bureau for SkinCeuticals, La Roche–Posay, Galderma, and Aclaris.

SDEF/Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

To listen to the interview, click on the play button below.

[email protected]

LAHAINA, HAWAII – “Protect and prevent” by applying an antioxidant and sunscreen in the morning, and focus on repair using a retinoid in the evening. That’s the simple message about daily skin care that clinicians can offer patients, according to Brooke Sikora, MD.

“At a very basic level, you want to tell your patients [to] use an antioxidant and use your sunscreen” early in the day, said Dr. Sikora, who is in private practice in Chestnut Hill, Mass. “In the evening, it’s all about repairing their damage, so make sure they’re getting on a retinol,” and if they can’t tolerate prescription strength, try a nonprescription product, she noted at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

“Aging factors create oxidative stress on the skin that leads to the development of these reactive oxygen species on the skin,” decreasing collagen production and increasing collagen breakdown, she explained during a presentation on cosmeceuticals at the meeting. Applying an antioxidant to the skin, however, can help neutralize “a lot of these reactive oxygen species and help to slow the breakdown of collagen.”

There is good evidence that peptides and growth factors – although expensive – work well and are worth recommending for patients “who really want to take their skin care to the next level,” Dr. Sikora said. “Then you can add corrective products like hyperpigmentation or acne products to treat ... specific concerns” as needed.

In an interview at the meeting, Dr. Sikora discussed these recommendations, as well as vitamin C use in the daily skin care routine. (To listen to the interview, click on the play button below.)

Vitamin C is the best-studied antioxidant, she noted during her presentation, and in vivo studies have shown it can stimulate collagen synthesis, reduce erythema of rosacea (which is why she has all her rosacea patients on vitamin C), reduce post-UVB erythema, decrease facial wrinkles, and increase dermal papillae.

Dr. Sikora disclosed that she is a consultant to and on the advisory board of SkinCeuticals, La Roche–Posay, Silk Therapeutics, Galderma, Evolus, and Allergen. She is on the speakers bureau for SkinCeuticals, La Roche–Posay, Galderma, and Aclaris.

SDEF/Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

To listen to the interview, click on the play button below.

[email protected]

LAHAINA, HAWAII – It’s important to counsel patients about the degree of improvement to expect with noninvasive skin tightening procedures, Nazanin Saedi, MD, said at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

Many devices are available that can be used for facial skin tightening, “but there are definitely limitations to what we can do noninvasively, and we really need to educate our patients about what we can do so that they have realistic expectations,” said Dr. Saedi, director of laser surgery and cosmetic dermatology at Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Philadelphia.

Treatment with these devices improve skin laxity, and some improve skin texture as well, she said. These devices are not an option for patients who want to have several inches of excess skin removed.

“You have to tell patients that this isn’t a replacement for a face-lift or a mini face-lift,” but patients can expect to see mild and modest improvement, and they’ll continue to see improvement for 3-6 months.

Patient selection is also important. Patients with mild to moderate laxity who do not want to undergo surgery and anesthesia are good candidates, as opposed to those who are older and have thin, sagging skin, Dr. Saedi said, noting that there still is no standard method of defining laxity.

She referred to a recent study illustrating the importance of counseling patients about what to expect. Of the 83 patients in a practice who had undergone microfocused ultrasound treatments and responded to an anonymous survey about the results of treatment, almost 80% reported at least mild improvement (14.5% said the improvement was significant, almost 28% said it was moderate, 37.3% said it was mild, and 20.5% said there was no improvement).

However, although about half (53.1%) reported being satisfied with their results, almost 45% said that the results did not meet their expectations (Lasers Surg Med. 2019;51[6]:495-9).

In an interview at the meeting, Dr. Saedi commented on these results and the importance of counseling.

Listen to the interview by clicking the play button at the end of this story.

During the presentation, Dr. Saedi, who is also codirector of cutaneous surgery in the department of dermatology and cutaneous biology at Sidney Kimmel Medical College, reviewed different technologies used for noninvasive skin tightening, including ablative and fractional laser resurfacing, radiofrequency, and microfocused ultrasound with visualization.

She disclosed serving on the advisory board and/or as a consultant for Aerolase, Alastin, Alma, Cartessa Aesthetics, Cynosure, and Vivo Capital, and that she has equipment from these companies, except for Vivo Capital and Alastin.

SDEF/Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

To listen to the interview, click the play button below.
 

[email protected]

LAHAINA, HAWAII – It’s important to counsel patients about the degree of improvement to expect with noninvasive skin tightening procedures, Nazanin Saedi, MD, said at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

Many devices are available that can be used for facial skin tightening, “but there are definitely limitations to what we can do noninvasively, and we really need to educate our patients about what we can do so that they have realistic expectations,” said Dr. Saedi, director of laser surgery and cosmetic dermatology at Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Philadelphia.

Treatment with these devices improve skin laxity, and some improve skin texture as well, she said. These devices are not an option for patients who want to have several inches of excess skin removed.

“You have to tell patients that this isn’t a replacement for a face-lift or a mini face-lift,” but patients can expect to see mild and modest improvement, and they’ll continue to see improvement for 3-6 months.

Patient selection is also important. Patients with mild to moderate laxity who do not want to undergo surgery and anesthesia are good candidates, as opposed to those who are older and have thin, sagging skin, Dr. Saedi said, noting that there still is no standard method of defining laxity.

She referred to a recent study illustrating the importance of counseling patients about what to expect. Of the 83 patients in a practice who had undergone microfocused ultrasound treatments and responded to an anonymous survey about the results of treatment, almost 80% reported at least mild improvement (14.5% said the improvement was significant, almost 28% said it was moderate, 37.3% said it was mild, and 20.5% said there was no improvement).

However, although about half (53.1%) reported being satisfied with their results, almost 45% said that the results did not meet their expectations (Lasers Surg Med. 2019;51[6]:495-9).

In an interview at the meeting, Dr. Saedi commented on these results and the importance of counseling.

Listen to the interview by clicking the play button at the end of this story.

During the presentation, Dr. Saedi, who is also codirector of cutaneous surgery in the department of dermatology and cutaneous biology at Sidney Kimmel Medical College, reviewed different technologies used for noninvasive skin tightening, including ablative and fractional laser resurfacing, radiofrequency, and microfocused ultrasound with visualization.

She disclosed serving on the advisory board and/or as a consultant for Aerolase, Alastin, Alma, Cartessa Aesthetics, Cynosure, and Vivo Capital, and that she has equipment from these companies, except for Vivo Capital and Alastin.

SDEF/Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

To listen to the interview, click the play button below.
 

[email protected]

LAHAINA, HAWAII – It’s important to counsel patients about the degree of improvement to expect with noninvasive skin tightening procedures, Nazanin Saedi, MD, said at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

Many devices are available that can be used for facial skin tightening, “but there are definitely limitations to what we can do noninvasively, and we really need to educate our patients about what we can do so that they have realistic expectations,” said Dr. Saedi, director of laser surgery and cosmetic dermatology at Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Philadelphia.

Treatment with these devices improve skin laxity, and some improve skin texture as well, she said. These devices are not an option for patients who want to have several inches of excess skin removed.

“You have to tell patients that this isn’t a replacement for a face-lift or a mini face-lift,” but patients can expect to see mild and modest improvement, and they’ll continue to see improvement for 3-6 months.

Patient selection is also important. Patients with mild to moderate laxity who do not want to undergo surgery and anesthesia are good candidates, as opposed to those who are older and have thin, sagging skin, Dr. Saedi said, noting that there still is no standard method of defining laxity.

She referred to a recent study illustrating the importance of counseling patients about what to expect. Of the 83 patients in a practice who had undergone microfocused ultrasound treatments and responded to an anonymous survey about the results of treatment, almost 80% reported at least mild improvement (14.5% said the improvement was significant, almost 28% said it was moderate, 37.3% said it was mild, and 20.5% said there was no improvement).

However, although about half (53.1%) reported being satisfied with their results, almost 45% said that the results did not meet their expectations (Lasers Surg Med. 2019;51[6]:495-9).

In an interview at the meeting, Dr. Saedi commented on these results and the importance of counseling.

Listen to the interview by clicking the play button at the end of this story.

During the presentation, Dr. Saedi, who is also codirector of cutaneous surgery in the department of dermatology and cutaneous biology at Sidney Kimmel Medical College, reviewed different technologies used for noninvasive skin tightening, including ablative and fractional laser resurfacing, radiofrequency, and microfocused ultrasound with visualization.

She disclosed serving on the advisory board and/or as a consultant for Aerolase, Alastin, Alma, Cartessa Aesthetics, Cynosure, and Vivo Capital, and that she has equipment from these companies, except for Vivo Capital and Alastin.

SDEF/Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

To listen to the interview, click the play button below.
 

[email protected]

LAHAINA, HAWAII – The list of nontraditional uses for botulinum toxin type A includes facial flushing, menopausal hot flashes, and androgenetic alopecia, Mark Rubin, MD, said at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

There are data to support these uses, and there are data associating botulinum toxin treatment with improvement in depression, which suggest the effect may not be necessarily be related to improvement in appearance, said Dr. Rubin, who is in private practice in Beverly Hills, Calif., and is associate professor of dermatology at the University of California, San Diego.

Facial flushing: Very few people use botulinum toxin for facial flushing, but Dr. Rubin, who is among those who do not, described the data as “impressive.” Several trials, he noted, have found that very small doses can significantly reduce the amount of facial erythema, including an average 45% reduction after 60 days in one trial of 24 women (Acta Med Iran. 2016 Jul;54[7]:454-7).

In another study of 25 patients with facial erythema related to rosacea who were treated with 14-45 units intradermally to the nasal tip, bridge, and alae, there were statistically significant improvements in erythema 1, 2, and 3 months after treatment among the 15 with complete data (Dermatol Surg. 2015 Jan;41 Suppl 1:S9-16).

“If you’re using very small doses and they’re intradermal, there really is minimal risk you’re going to have a problem by inadvertently affecting musculature” in these patients, Dr. Rubin commented.

In another study of 9 patients with rosacea, treatment with incobotulinumtoxinA was associated with a significant reduction in erythema, papules, pustules, and telangiectasias, up to 15 weeks, compared with saline. The treatment patients also experienced less burning and stinging that did those who received saline (J Drugs Dermatol. 2017 Jun 1;16[6]:549-54.)

Menopausal hot flashes: Dr. Rubin described one study of 60 patients with severe hot flashes that compared saline with botulinum toxin, injected in 40 sites (2 units per site), including the neck, hairline, scalp, and chest. At 60 days’ follow-up, those treated with botulinum toxin had a significant reduction in sweating and in the number and severity of hot flashes; these women also had improved mood in terms of depression and irritability (Dermatol Surg. 2011 Nov;37[11]:1579-83).

Androgenetic alopecia: In a 60-week study of 50 men with androgenetic alopecia (Hamilton ratings of II-IV), 150 units of botulinum toxin A was injected into the scalp muscles (temporalis, frontalis, periauricular, and occipital), and repeated 6 months later (Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 Nov;126[5]:246e-8e). Among the 40 patients who completed the trial, 75% had a response, and from baseline to 48 weeks, there was an 18% increase in mean hair counts in a 2 cm area, and a“profound” 39% reduction in hair loss (as measured by hair counts on the pillow in the morning), Dr. Rubin noted.

“Presumably, this is because if you’re relaxing the scalp muscles you’re getting increased blood flow into the scalp,” including increased oxygenation, which decreases the conversion of testosterone to dihydrotestosterone and increases the conversion of testosterone to estradiol, he said.

In another study, 8 of 10 patients with androgenic alopecia has “good to excellent” results 24 weeks after botulinum toxin injections with 5 units per site at 30 sites. Referring to the increasing popularity of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for male pattern alopecia, Dr. Rubin said that in his opinion “PRP certainly doesn’t do any better” than botulinum toxin for male pattern alopecia and is a much more involved injection, “so this is definitely something worth considering if you have more people coming into your practice thinking about injections for male pattern alopecia.”

Pore size and sebum production: A 2019 review of published studies of botulinum toxin A looking at the effect on sebum and pore size, Dr. Rubin said, found that most studies “suggest it does actually reduce pore size and sebum production” (J Cosmet Dermatol. 2019 Apr;18[2]:451-7).

This can be considered an option for those patients concerned about pore size, who are not satisfied with results of retinoid or laser treatment, he commented. This approach may not have an effect in all patients, so he advised first treating a small trial area, and photographing patients to record their level of improvement. “It’s rarely profound, but it’s additive, it’s one more thing you can do.”

Depression: These data include a study of 30 patients with major depression, half who received one onabotulinumtoxinA injection in the glabellar area as adjunctive treatment of depression. After 6 weeks, those who were treated had an average of 47% reduction in depression scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, compared with an average 9% reduction among those on placebo (J Psychiatr Res. 2012 May;46[5]:574-81). Two recent studies have had similar results, according to Dr. Rubin.

Results of another study, he said, raise the question of whether patients are less depressed because they are pleased with the cosmetic effects or if there is another explanation (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016 Jan;74[1]:171-3.e1). The study, which included 59 patients with depression treated in the glabellar areas with botulinum toxin injections, found no association between severity of the furrows and degree of depression or between the degree of furrow correction and degree of relief from depression after treatment. “So the patients who had the most improvement were not necessarily the ones who were the least depressed afterwards,” he said.

These data imply that something else may be occurring that is not necessarily muscle related, he said.

Dr. Rubin said he had no relevant disclosures. SDEF/Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

[email protected]

LAHAINA, HAWAII – The list of nontraditional uses for botulinum toxin type A includes facial flushing, menopausal hot flashes, and androgenetic alopecia, Mark Rubin, MD, said at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

There are data to support these uses, and there are data associating botulinum toxin treatment with improvement in depression, which suggest the effect may not be necessarily be related to improvement in appearance, said Dr. Rubin, who is in private practice in Beverly Hills, Calif., and is associate professor of dermatology at the University of California, San Diego.

Facial flushing: Very few people use botulinum toxin for facial flushing, but Dr. Rubin, who is among those who do not, described the data as “impressive.” Several trials, he noted, have found that very small doses can significantly reduce the amount of facial erythema, including an average 45% reduction after 60 days in one trial of 24 women (Acta Med Iran. 2016 Jul;54[7]:454-7).

In another study of 25 patients with facial erythema related to rosacea who were treated with 14-45 units intradermally to the nasal tip, bridge, and alae, there were statistically significant improvements in erythema 1, 2, and 3 months after treatment among the 15 with complete data (Dermatol Surg. 2015 Jan;41 Suppl 1:S9-16).

“If you’re using very small doses and they’re intradermal, there really is minimal risk you’re going to have a problem by inadvertently affecting musculature” in these patients, Dr. Rubin commented.

In another study of 9 patients with rosacea, treatment with incobotulinumtoxinA was associated with a significant reduction in erythema, papules, pustules, and telangiectasias, up to 15 weeks, compared with saline. The treatment patients also experienced less burning and stinging that did those who received saline (J Drugs Dermatol. 2017 Jun 1;16[6]:549-54.)

Menopausal hot flashes: Dr. Rubin described one study of 60 patients with severe hot flashes that compared saline with botulinum toxin, injected in 40 sites (2 units per site), including the neck, hairline, scalp, and chest. At 60 days’ follow-up, those treated with botulinum toxin had a significant reduction in sweating and in the number and severity of hot flashes; these women also had improved mood in terms of depression and irritability (Dermatol Surg. 2011 Nov;37[11]:1579-83).

Androgenetic alopecia: In a 60-week study of 50 men with androgenetic alopecia (Hamilton ratings of II-IV), 150 units of botulinum toxin A was injected into the scalp muscles (temporalis, frontalis, periauricular, and occipital), and repeated 6 months later (Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 Nov;126[5]:246e-8e). Among the 40 patients who completed the trial, 75% had a response, and from baseline to 48 weeks, there was an 18% increase in mean hair counts in a 2 cm area, and a“profound” 39% reduction in hair loss (as measured by hair counts on the pillow in the morning), Dr. Rubin noted.

“Presumably, this is because if you’re relaxing the scalp muscles you’re getting increased blood flow into the scalp,” including increased oxygenation, which decreases the conversion of testosterone to dihydrotestosterone and increases the conversion of testosterone to estradiol, he said.

In another study, 8 of 10 patients with androgenic alopecia has “good to excellent” results 24 weeks after botulinum toxin injections with 5 units per site at 30 sites. Referring to the increasing popularity of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for male pattern alopecia, Dr. Rubin said that in his opinion “PRP certainly doesn’t do any better” than botulinum toxin for male pattern alopecia and is a much more involved injection, “so this is definitely something worth considering if you have more people coming into your practice thinking about injections for male pattern alopecia.”

Pore size and sebum production: A 2019 review of published studies of botulinum toxin A looking at the effect on sebum and pore size, Dr. Rubin said, found that most studies “suggest it does actually reduce pore size and sebum production” (J Cosmet Dermatol. 2019 Apr;18[2]:451-7).

This can be considered an option for those patients concerned about pore size, who are not satisfied with results of retinoid or laser treatment, he commented. This approach may not have an effect in all patients, so he advised first treating a small trial area, and photographing patients to record their level of improvement. “It’s rarely profound, but it’s additive, it’s one more thing you can do.”

Depression: These data include a study of 30 patients with major depression, half who received one onabotulinumtoxinA injection in the glabellar area as adjunctive treatment of depression. After 6 weeks, those who were treated had an average of 47% reduction in depression scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, compared with an average 9% reduction among those on placebo (J Psychiatr Res. 2012 May;46[5]:574-81). Two recent studies have had similar results, according to Dr. Rubin.

Results of another study, he said, raise the question of whether patients are less depressed because they are pleased with the cosmetic effects or if there is another explanation (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016 Jan;74[1]:171-3.e1). The study, which included 59 patients with depression treated in the glabellar areas with botulinum toxin injections, found no association between severity of the furrows and degree of depression or between the degree of furrow correction and degree of relief from depression after treatment. “So the patients who had the most improvement were not necessarily the ones who were the least depressed afterwards,” he said.

These data imply that something else may be occurring that is not necessarily muscle related, he said.

Dr. Rubin said he had no relevant disclosures. SDEF/Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

[email protected]

LAHAINA, HAWAII – The list of nontraditional uses for botulinum toxin type A includes facial flushing, menopausal hot flashes, and androgenetic alopecia, Mark Rubin, MD, said at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

There are data to support these uses, and there are data associating botulinum toxin treatment with improvement in depression, which suggest the effect may not be necessarily be related to improvement in appearance, said Dr. Rubin, who is in private practice in Beverly Hills, Calif., and is associate professor of dermatology at the University of California, San Diego.

Facial flushing: Very few people use botulinum toxin for facial flushing, but Dr. Rubin, who is among those who do not, described the data as “impressive.” Several trials, he noted, have found that very small doses can significantly reduce the amount of facial erythema, including an average 45% reduction after 60 days in one trial of 24 women (Acta Med Iran. 2016 Jul;54[7]:454-7).

In another study of 25 patients with facial erythema related to rosacea who were treated with 14-45 units intradermally to the nasal tip, bridge, and alae, there were statistically significant improvements in erythema 1, 2, and 3 months after treatment among the 15 with complete data (Dermatol Surg. 2015 Jan;41 Suppl 1:S9-16).

“If you’re using very small doses and they’re intradermal, there really is minimal risk you’re going to have a problem by inadvertently affecting musculature” in these patients, Dr. Rubin commented.

In another study of 9 patients with rosacea, treatment with incobotulinumtoxinA was associated with a significant reduction in erythema, papules, pustules, and telangiectasias, up to 15 weeks, compared with saline. The treatment patients also experienced less burning and stinging that did those who received saline (J Drugs Dermatol. 2017 Jun 1;16[6]:549-54.)

Menopausal hot flashes: Dr. Rubin described one study of 60 patients with severe hot flashes that compared saline with botulinum toxin, injected in 40 sites (2 units per site), including the neck, hairline, scalp, and chest. At 60 days’ follow-up, those treated with botulinum toxin had a significant reduction in sweating and in the number and severity of hot flashes; these women also had improved mood in terms of depression and irritability (Dermatol Surg. 2011 Nov;37[11]:1579-83).

Androgenetic alopecia: In a 60-week study of 50 men with androgenetic alopecia (Hamilton ratings of II-IV), 150 units of botulinum toxin A was injected into the scalp muscles (temporalis, frontalis, periauricular, and occipital), and repeated 6 months later (Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 Nov;126[5]:246e-8e). Among the 40 patients who completed the trial, 75% had a response, and from baseline to 48 weeks, there was an 18% increase in mean hair counts in a 2 cm area, and a“profound” 39% reduction in hair loss (as measured by hair counts on the pillow in the morning), Dr. Rubin noted.

“Presumably, this is because if you’re relaxing the scalp muscles you’re getting increased blood flow into the scalp,” including increased oxygenation, which decreases the conversion of testosterone to dihydrotestosterone and increases the conversion of testosterone to estradiol, he said.

In another study, 8 of 10 patients with androgenic alopecia has “good to excellent” results 24 weeks after botulinum toxin injections with 5 units per site at 30 sites. Referring to the increasing popularity of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for male pattern alopecia, Dr. Rubin said that in his opinion “PRP certainly doesn’t do any better” than botulinum toxin for male pattern alopecia and is a much more involved injection, “so this is definitely something worth considering if you have more people coming into your practice thinking about injections for male pattern alopecia.”

Pore size and sebum production: A 2019 review of published studies of botulinum toxin A looking at the effect on sebum and pore size, Dr. Rubin said, found that most studies “suggest it does actually reduce pore size and sebum production” (J Cosmet Dermatol. 2019 Apr;18[2]:451-7).

This can be considered an option for those patients concerned about pore size, who are not satisfied with results of retinoid or laser treatment, he commented. This approach may not have an effect in all patients, so he advised first treating a small trial area, and photographing patients to record their level of improvement. “It’s rarely profound, but it’s additive, it’s one more thing you can do.”

Depression: These data include a study of 30 patients with major depression, half who received one onabotulinumtoxinA injection in the glabellar area as adjunctive treatment of depression. After 6 weeks, those who were treated had an average of 47% reduction in depression scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, compared with an average 9% reduction among those on placebo (J Psychiatr Res. 2012 May;46[5]:574-81). Two recent studies have had similar results, according to Dr. Rubin.

Results of another study, he said, raise the question of whether patients are less depressed because they are pleased with the cosmetic effects or if there is another explanation (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016 Jan;74[1]:171-3.e1). The study, which included 59 patients with depression treated in the glabellar areas with botulinum toxin injections, found no association between severity of the furrows and degree of depression or between the degree of furrow correction and degree of relief from depression after treatment. “So the patients who had the most improvement were not necessarily the ones who were the least depressed afterwards,” he said.

These data imply that something else may be occurring that is not necessarily muscle related, he said.

Dr. Rubin said he had no relevant disclosures. SDEF/Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

[email protected]

The time course and proper management of vascular occlusion attributable to interarterial hyaluronic acid fillers is critical. Albeit a rare complication, off-label uses of HA fillers, lack of proper training of injectors, and lack of clear appropriate guidelines in the management of these complications are some of the causes of delayed treatment and necrotic complications.

There are currently no definitive guidelines for the management of filler-associated cutaneous necrosis as experience with its treatment continues to evolve and be reported. In an attempt to consolidate the published data, as well as to give somewhat of a clear guideline of expectations, a time course and treatment guide has been outlined. The following is a working guideline for management of vascular occlusion attributable to HA fillers based on reports in the literature. This is not a consensus statement, rather it is a consolidation of the anecdotal reports and case studies outlined to help practitioners. It is also not inclusive of all the presentations of vascular occlusion. There are delayed cases of vascular occlusion beginning several days after injection, as well as alternative treatment options that may be considered.

These guidelines also are not for the devastating complication of blindness because of vascular occlusion secondary to fillers. Blindness is beyond the scope of the current article; however, we believe all experienced injectors should have emergency preparations in place and a relationship with an ophthalmologist or other trained surgeons experienced in performing retrobulbar hyaluronidase injections who can be reached in the event of a suspected occlusion. Any symptoms of eye pain, headache, or visual changes need to be immediately treated. Vascular occlusion is an emergency and timing is critical to prevent permanent blindness and facial deformities.

As with all filler injections, risks and complications can happen, and we cannot stress enough the appropriate level of training, as well as expert understanding of anatomy and injection technique, in minimizing potential risks. We encourage regulations and a required level of training to perform these procedures.
 

Dr. Wesley and Dr. Talakoub are cocontributors to this column. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. This month’s column is by Dr. Talakoub. Write to them at [email protected]. They had no relevant disclosures.

The time course and proper management of vascular occlusion attributable to interarterial hyaluronic acid fillers is critical. Albeit a rare complication, off-label uses of HA fillers, lack of proper training of injectors, and lack of clear appropriate guidelines in the management of these complications are some of the causes of delayed treatment and necrotic complications.

There are currently no definitive guidelines for the management of filler-associated cutaneous necrosis as experience with its treatment continues to evolve and be reported. In an attempt to consolidate the published data, as well as to give somewhat of a clear guideline of expectations, a time course and treatment guide has been outlined. The following is a working guideline for management of vascular occlusion attributable to HA fillers based on reports in the literature. This is not a consensus statement, rather it is a consolidation of the anecdotal reports and case studies outlined to help practitioners. It is also not inclusive of all the presentations of vascular occlusion. There are delayed cases of vascular occlusion beginning several days after injection, as well as alternative treatment options that may be considered.

These guidelines also are not for the devastating complication of blindness because of vascular occlusion secondary to fillers. Blindness is beyond the scope of the current article; however, we believe all experienced injectors should have emergency preparations in place and a relationship with an ophthalmologist or other trained surgeons experienced in performing retrobulbar hyaluronidase injections who can be reached in the event of a suspected occlusion. Any symptoms of eye pain, headache, or visual changes need to be immediately treated. Vascular occlusion is an emergency and timing is critical to prevent permanent blindness and facial deformities.

As with all filler injections, risks and complications can happen, and we cannot stress enough the appropriate level of training, as well as expert understanding of anatomy and injection technique, in minimizing potential risks. We encourage regulations and a required level of training to perform these procedures.
 

Dr. Wesley and Dr. Talakoub are cocontributors to this column. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. This month’s column is by Dr. Talakoub. Write to them at [email protected]. They had no relevant disclosures.

The time course and proper management of vascular occlusion attributable to interarterial hyaluronic acid fillers is critical. Albeit a rare complication, off-label uses of HA fillers, lack of proper training of injectors, and lack of clear appropriate guidelines in the management of these complications are some of the causes of delayed treatment and necrotic complications.

There are currently no definitive guidelines for the management of filler-associated cutaneous necrosis as experience with its treatment continues to evolve and be reported. In an attempt to consolidate the published data, as well as to give somewhat of a clear guideline of expectations, a time course and treatment guide has been outlined. The following is a working guideline for management of vascular occlusion attributable to HA fillers based on reports in the literature. This is not a consensus statement, rather it is a consolidation of the anecdotal reports and case studies outlined to help practitioners. It is also not inclusive of all the presentations of vascular occlusion. There are delayed cases of vascular occlusion beginning several days after injection, as well as alternative treatment options that may be considered.

These guidelines also are not for the devastating complication of blindness because of vascular occlusion secondary to fillers. Blindness is beyond the scope of the current article; however, we believe all experienced injectors should have emergency preparations in place and a relationship with an ophthalmologist or other trained surgeons experienced in performing retrobulbar hyaluronidase injections who can be reached in the event of a suspected occlusion. Any symptoms of eye pain, headache, or visual changes need to be immediately treated. Vascular occlusion is an emergency and timing is critical to prevent permanent blindness and facial deformities.

As with all filler injections, risks and complications can happen, and we cannot stress enough the appropriate level of training, as well as expert understanding of anatomy and injection technique, in minimizing potential risks. We encourage regulations and a required level of training to perform these procedures.
 

Dr. Wesley and Dr. Talakoub are cocontributors to this column. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. This month’s column is by Dr. Talakoub. Write to them at [email protected]. They had no relevant disclosures.

Outcomes are improved when proper skincare is practiced before and after any type of dermatologic procedure. This column reviews cosmeceutical ingredients that may affect procedure results. It is important to support the healing events that follow procedures to maximize outcomes. These are ingredients commonly used before, during, and after procedures.

I will use the first person when I am expressing my personal opinion or experience versus data reported in published studies that I reference.
 

Ascorbic acid

Ascorbic acid (vitamin C) is an essential cofactor necessary for lysyl hydroxylase and prolyl hydroxylase to produce collagen. Many studies have demonstrated that the use of oral and topical ascorbic acid increases collagen production by fibroblasts.^1-3 Several different ascorbic acid products, varying greatly in quality, are available on the market.

Ascorbic acid is very sensitive to light and air exposure and does not penetrate well if not at a pH of 2 or 2.5. There are aqueous and lipophilic formulations. Some are produced from L-ascorbic acid, while others are made from ascorbyl palmitate, or salts such as calcium ascorbate, magnesium ascorbate, magnesium ascorbyl phosphate, sodium ascorbate, and sodium ascorbyl phosphate. Consequently, one must closely evaluate any chosen ascorbic acid preparation and pay close attention to the form used in any studies. I am discussing ascorbic acid in general, but my statements only apply to properly formulated products. Most of the studies I quote used L-ascorbic acid, which is the form studied by the late Sheldon Pinnell, MD, who was an expert on ascorbic acid.

Properly formulated L-ascorbic acid products have a low pH. Unless formulated specifically to deter stinging, these low-pH preparations will sting wounded skin. For this reason, most ascorbic acid preparations should be avoided until the skin has completely re-epithelialized. I prefer using it preprocedure and after the procedure once the skin has re-epithelialized. Alster and West showed that use of ascorbic acid – in an aqueous solution formulated not to sting – after laser resurfacing resulted in a significant decrease in post‐CO₂ laser resurfacing erythema by the eighth postoperative week when compared with laser‐irradiated skin that had not received topical vitamin C.⁴

I prefer using ascorbic acid in patients before and after procedures involving fillers, toxins, skin tightening, and nonablative lasers. In my experience, this improves collagen production. Also, I use ascorbic acid before microneedling, but not during or after. Several case reports have cited allergic granulomatous reactions when ascorbic acid is used during microneedling procedures,⁵ although these reports did not involve aqueous formulations.


 

Defensin

2020 MetaBeauty Used with permission

Defensins are peptides that play an important role in wound repair. Defensin has exhibited the capacity to activate the leucine-rich repeat-containing G-protein–coupled receptors 5 and 6 (also known as LGR5+ and LGR6+) stem cells.⁶ This accelerates wound healing by stimulating LGR stem cells to form new keratinocytes that populate the epidermis.⁷ Using defensins prior to procedures would theoretically speed wound healing, but no studies have been published in this area. Anecdotally, it has been used after microneedling without complication. I have not used defensin in this situation, but when I have asked the audience during lectures, many practitioners have reported using it and found that it accelerates healing.

Growth factors

Growth factors are essential in the skin because they are responsible for immunomodulation, regulation of cell division, wound healing, and tissue generation.¹ There are several important growth factor families, including: transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-beta), epidermal growth factor (EGF), insulin-like growth factor (IGF), platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), and fibroblast growth factor (FGF).² Because of the numerous different variables that play a role with growth factor function, it is difficult to know exactly which combinations are the most helpful to improve outcomes after procedures. There is some evidence to support the use of FGF, TGF-beta, and EGF, IGF, and PDGF to hasten skin healing.^8,9 It is certain that growth factors play an important role in pre- and postprocedure skincare, but we do not yet know which growth factor combinations are the most effective.

Heparan sulfate

Heparan sulfate is a glycosaminoglycan found in the skin. Older cells are less responsive to growth factors than are younger cells; therefore, it is desirable to amplify the growth factor signal in older patients. Heparan sulfate has been shown to contribute to growth factors reaching the receptors on the cell surface and enhancing the cell’s ability to “hear” growth factor signals. Combining growth factors with enhancers such as heparan sulfate, defensins, ascorbic acid, and matrikines can improve outcomes of cosmetic procedures. There are not enough studies yet to substantiate which combinations are the most effective. However, I believe that if you are using a growth factor–containing product after a procedure, you should combine it with heparan sulfate to improve efficacy.

Heparan sulfate is not the same as the blood thinner heparin; however, it may affect clotting factors. It is prudent to stop heparan sulfate the day before a dermal filler procedure because of this theoretical risk. (I have not seen an increase in bruising in patients who use heparan sulfate prior to getting fillers.) I suggest using heparan sulfate–containing products with growth factors 24 hours after injecting fillers to try and enhance collagen synthesis that occurs after hyaluronic acid (HA) filler injections.¹⁰

Hyaluronic acid

Hyaluronic acid (HA) is known to increase penetration of drugs, as well as cosmeceutical ingredients.¹¹ For this reason, it is often used before a procedure to increase efficacy of growth factors. Many practitioners report using it during microneedling to help the device glide across the skin. I have not observed or heard of any reports of adverse events from using it during microneedling.

HA has been shown to accelerate wound healing in rats¹² and dental procedures.¹³ For this reason, it is often used after laser resurfacing and microneedling procedures and on sutured and open wounds. HA can vary in chain link and molecular weight and whether or not it is cross linked. These differences affect efficacy and should be taken into consideration when choosing an HA product. Some formulations combine various forms of HA. Because HA may increase bruising because of its effects on fibrin formation,¹⁴ I prefer not to use it 2 days prior to or the day of filler injections.¹⁵

Hydroxy acids

Pretreating skin with hydroxy acids increases dermal matrix formation,¹⁶ promotes collagen synthesis,¹⁷ and hastens stratum corneum turnover.¹⁸ Although postprocedure healing times after pretreatment with hydroxy acids has not been studied, it is very likely that pretreatment with hydroxy acids speeds healing time by increasing collagen production and cell turnover. West and Alster showed that pretreating skin with hydroxy acids prior to CO₂ resurfacing did not affect the incidence of postprocedure hyperpigmentation.¹⁹

Matrikines

Matrikines are peptides that occur when extracellular matrix (ECM) macromolecules are partially degraded. These peptides interact with cell surface receptors and activate intracellular signalling pathways to modulate ECM remodeling.²⁰ Matrikines, such as tripeptides and hexapeptides, have been shown to remove damaged collagen and elastin from the ECM.²¹ It is thought that these matrikines help to prepare the skin for procedures by freeing up space to allow room for newly formed collagen. Using matrikines at least 2 weeks before procedures may precondition the skin to heal faster.²²

The tripeptide glycyl-histidyl-lysine (GHK) is a good example of a matrikine. When it forms a complex with copper (II) ions (GHK–Cu) it can stimulate collagen and glycosaminoglycan synthesis²³ and increase tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases, TIMP-1 and TIMP-2, which play a role in wound remodeling.²⁴

A serum that contains tripeptide-1, hexapeptide-12, lactoferrin, and phosphatidyl serine has been shown to speed resolution of bruises and inflammation when applied after procedures. It is believed that these ingredients activate macrophages to clear hemosiderin from the skin.
 

Retinoids

Derived from vitamin A, the retinoid family includes compounds such as adapalene, retinol, tazarotene, trifarotene, and tretinoin. Retinoids should be used for at least 2-4 weeks prior to procedures to improve outcomes. Multiple studies have cogently revealed that pretreatment with tretinoin accelerates wound healing.^25-27 Kligman assessed healing after punch biopsy in the mid-1990s and found that the wounds on arms pretreated with tretinoin cream 0.05%-0.1% were significantly diminished by 35%-37% on days 1 and 4 and 47%-50% reduced on days 6, 8, and 11 as compared with the wounds on untreated arms.²⁸ A tretinoin pretreatment regimen of 2-4 weeks is supported by the preponderance of studies²⁹ because peak epidermal hypertrophy emerges after 7 days of tretinoin application and normalizes after 14 days of continued treatment.³⁰ Such an approach gives the skin time to recover from any retinoid dermatitis before the procedure is performed. Pretreatment with adapalene requires an earlier initiation period and should be introduced 5-6 weeks before procedures because it exhibits a longer half-life.³¹

Topical retinoids should not be used after a procedure until re-epithelialization is complete. Hung et al. applied 0.05% tretinoin cream daily for 10 days prior to partial-thickness skin wounding in a porcine model, with results revealing that re-epithelialization was accelerated with preprocedure treatment while use after the procedure slowed wound healing.³²

Skin care regimen design by procedure type

Procedures can be divided into six main types: nonablative, such as peels, intense pulsed light (IPL), and vascular or pigmented lasers; microneedling or other procedures that cause open channels into the dermis; injectables such as toxins and fillers; ablative, such as CO₂, erbium, and fractionated lasers; sutured wounds; and unsutured wounds. Skincare regimens that are prescribed before and after each of these procedures should take into account the Baumann Skin Type, the procedure type, whether it is pre- or postprocedure, and lifestyle issues such as sun exposure. Once the pre- and postprocedure regimen has been designed, patients should be given specific instructions as to which brands, the exact products, and the order in which to apply them.

Conclusion

To ensure the best outcomes from surgical treatments, patient education is a key step. The more that patients know and understand about the ways in which they can prepare for their procedure and treat their skin after the procedure, the better the results. Providers should give this type of information in an easy-to-follow printed instruction sheet because studies show that patients cannot remember most of the oral instructions offered by practitioners. Patients should be encouraged to ask questions during their consultation and procedure and to express any concerns with the practitioner’s office should any arise after they have returned home. These steps help improve patient compliance, satisfaction, and outcomes. Please discuss your opinions and experience with me on LinkedIn. You can also see a lecture on this topic on my website, SkinGuru.com.

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author, and entrepreneur who practices in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote two textbooks: “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002) and “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2014), as well as a New York Times Best Sellers book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Evolus, Galderma, and Revance. She is the founder and CEO of Skin Type Solutions Franchise Systems. Write to her at [email protected].

References

1. Murad S et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1981 May;78(5):2879-82.

2. Tajima S, Pinnell SR. J Dermatol Sci. 1996 Mar;11(3):250-3.

3. Geesin JC et al. J Invest Dermatol. 1988 Apr;90(4):420-4.

4. Alster TS, West TB. Dermatol Surg. 1998 Mar;24(3):331-4.

5. Soltani-Arabshahi R et al. JAMA Dermatol. 2014 Jan;150(1):68-72.

6. Lough D et al. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 Nov;132(5):1159-71.

7. Hirsch T et al. J Gene Med. 2009 Mar;11(3):220-8.

8. Van Brunt J, Klausner A. Nat Biotechnol. 1988 Jan 1;6:25-30.

9. Lynch SE et al. J Clin Invest. 1989 Aug;84(2):640-6.

10. Wang F et al. Arch Dermatol. 2007 Feb;143(2):155-63.

11. Huang G, Huang H. Drug Deliv. 2018 Nov;25(1):766-72.

12. Celani LM. J Surg Clin Res. 2019 Oct. doi: 10.20398/jscr.v10i2.18825.

13. Yildirim S et al. J Periodontol. 2018 Jan;89(1):36-45.

14. Weigel PH et al. Ciba Found Symp. 1989;143:248-61; discussion 261-4, 281-5.

15. Basora JF et al. Am J Case Rep. 2014 May 9;15:199-202.

16. Okano Yet al. Exp Dermatol. 2003;12 Suppl 2:57-63.

17. Bernstein EF et al. Dermatol Surg. 2001 May;27(5):429-33.

18. Hood HL et al. Food Chem Toxicol. 1999 Nov;37(11):1105-11.

19. West TB, Alster TS. Dermatol Surg. 1999 Jan;25(1):15-7.

20. Maquart FX et al. M. Biochimie. 2005 Mar-Apr;87(3-4):353-60.

21. Pickart L et al. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:648108.

22. Widgerow AD et al. Aesthet Surg J. 2019 Apr 8;39 (Supplement 3):S103-11.

23. Maquart FX et al. FEBS Lett. 1988 Oct 10;238(2):343-6.

24. Siméon A et al. J Invest Dermatol. 1999 Jun;112(6):957-64.

25. Vagotis FL, Brundage SR. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1995 May-Jun;19(3):243-6.

26. Stuzin JM. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Mar;127(3):1343-5.

27. Elson ML. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1998 Aug;39:S79-81.

28. Popp C et al. Br J Dermatol. 1995 Jan;132(1):46-53.

29. Orringer JS et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2004 Dec;51(6):940-6.

30. Kim IH et al. J Korean Med Sci. 1996 Aug;11(4):335-41.

31. Basak PY et al. Eur J Dermatol. 2002 Mar-Apr;12(2):145-8.

32. Hung VC et al. Arch Dermatol. 1989 Jan;125(1):65-9.
 

Outcomes are improved when proper skincare is practiced before and after any type of dermatologic procedure. This column reviews cosmeceutical ingredients that may affect procedure results. It is important to support the healing events that follow procedures to maximize outcomes. These are ingredients commonly used before, during, and after procedures.

I will use the first person when I am expressing my personal opinion or experience versus data reported in published studies that I reference.
 

Ascorbic acid

Ascorbic acid (vitamin C) is an essential cofactor necessary for lysyl hydroxylase and prolyl hydroxylase to produce collagen. Many studies have demonstrated that the use of oral and topical ascorbic acid increases collagen production by fibroblasts.^1-3 Several different ascorbic acid products, varying greatly in quality, are available on the market.

Ascorbic acid is very sensitive to light and air exposure and does not penetrate well if not at a pH of 2 or 2.5. There are aqueous and lipophilic formulations. Some are produced from L-ascorbic acid, while others are made from ascorbyl palmitate, or salts such as calcium ascorbate, magnesium ascorbate, magnesium ascorbyl phosphate, sodium ascorbate, and sodium ascorbyl phosphate. Consequently, one must closely evaluate any chosen ascorbic acid preparation and pay close attention to the form used in any studies. I am discussing ascorbic acid in general, but my statements only apply to properly formulated products. Most of the studies I quote used L-ascorbic acid, which is the form studied by the late Sheldon Pinnell, MD, who was an expert on ascorbic acid.

Properly formulated L-ascorbic acid products have a low pH. Unless formulated specifically to deter stinging, these low-pH preparations will sting wounded skin. For this reason, most ascorbic acid preparations should be avoided until the skin has completely re-epithelialized. I prefer using it preprocedure and after the procedure once the skin has re-epithelialized. Alster and West showed that use of ascorbic acid – in an aqueous solution formulated not to sting – after laser resurfacing resulted in a significant decrease in post‐CO₂ laser resurfacing erythema by the eighth postoperative week when compared with laser‐irradiated skin that had not received topical vitamin C.⁴

I prefer using ascorbic acid in patients before and after procedures involving fillers, toxins, skin tightening, and nonablative lasers. In my experience, this improves collagen production. Also, I use ascorbic acid before microneedling, but not during or after. Several case reports have cited allergic granulomatous reactions when ascorbic acid is used during microneedling procedures,⁵ although these reports did not involve aqueous formulations.


 

Defensin

2020 MetaBeauty Used with permission

Defensins are peptides that play an important role in wound repair. Defensin has exhibited the capacity to activate the leucine-rich repeat-containing G-protein–coupled receptors 5 and 6 (also known as LGR5+ and LGR6+) stem cells.⁶ This accelerates wound healing by stimulating LGR stem cells to form new keratinocytes that populate the epidermis.⁷ Using defensins prior to procedures would theoretically speed wound healing, but no studies have been published in this area. Anecdotally, it has been used after microneedling without complication. I have not used defensin in this situation, but when I have asked the audience during lectures, many practitioners have reported using it and found that it accelerates healing.

Growth factors

Growth factors are essential in the skin because they are responsible for immunomodulation, regulation of cell division, wound healing, and tissue generation.¹ There are several important growth factor families, including: transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-beta), epidermal growth factor (EGF), insulin-like growth factor (IGF), platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), and fibroblast growth factor (FGF).² Because of the numerous different variables that play a role with growth factor function, it is difficult to know exactly which combinations are the most helpful to improve outcomes after procedures. There is some evidence to support the use of FGF, TGF-beta, and EGF, IGF, and PDGF to hasten skin healing.^8,9 It is certain that growth factors play an important role in pre- and postprocedure skincare, but we do not yet know which growth factor combinations are the most effective.

Heparan sulfate

Heparan sulfate is a glycosaminoglycan found in the skin. Older cells are less responsive to growth factors than are younger cells; therefore, it is desirable to amplify the growth factor signal in older patients. Heparan sulfate has been shown to contribute to growth factors reaching the receptors on the cell surface and enhancing the cell’s ability to “hear” growth factor signals. Combining growth factors with enhancers such as heparan sulfate, defensins, ascorbic acid, and matrikines can improve outcomes of cosmetic procedures. There are not enough studies yet to substantiate which combinations are the most effective. However, I believe that if you are using a growth factor–containing product after a procedure, you should combine it with heparan sulfate to improve efficacy.

Heparan sulfate is not the same as the blood thinner heparin; however, it may affect clotting factors. It is prudent to stop heparan sulfate the day before a dermal filler procedure because of this theoretical risk. (I have not seen an increase in bruising in patients who use heparan sulfate prior to getting fillers.) I suggest using heparan sulfate–containing products with growth factors 24 hours after injecting fillers to try and enhance collagen synthesis that occurs after hyaluronic acid (HA) filler injections.¹⁰

Hyaluronic acid

Hyaluronic acid (HA) is known to increase penetration of drugs, as well as cosmeceutical ingredients.¹¹ For this reason, it is often used before a procedure to increase efficacy of growth factors. Many practitioners report using it during microneedling to help the device glide across the skin. I have not observed or heard of any reports of adverse events from using it during microneedling.

HA has been shown to accelerate wound healing in rats¹² and dental procedures.¹³ For this reason, it is often used after laser resurfacing and microneedling procedures and on sutured and open wounds. HA can vary in chain link and molecular weight and whether or not it is cross linked. These differences affect efficacy and should be taken into consideration when choosing an HA product. Some formulations combine various forms of HA. Because HA may increase bruising because of its effects on fibrin formation,¹⁴ I prefer not to use it 2 days prior to or the day of filler injections.¹⁵

Hydroxy acids

Pretreating skin with hydroxy acids increases dermal matrix formation,¹⁶ promotes collagen synthesis,¹⁷ and hastens stratum corneum turnover.¹⁸ Although postprocedure healing times after pretreatment with hydroxy acids has not been studied, it is very likely that pretreatment with hydroxy acids speeds healing time by increasing collagen production and cell turnover. West and Alster showed that pretreating skin with hydroxy acids prior to CO₂ resurfacing did not affect the incidence of postprocedure hyperpigmentation.¹⁹

Matrikines

Matrikines are peptides that occur when extracellular matrix (ECM) macromolecules are partially degraded. These peptides interact with cell surface receptors and activate intracellular signalling pathways to modulate ECM remodeling.²⁰ Matrikines, such as tripeptides and hexapeptides, have been shown to remove damaged collagen and elastin from the ECM.²¹ It is thought that these matrikines help to prepare the skin for procedures by freeing up space to allow room for newly formed collagen. Using matrikines at least 2 weeks before procedures may precondition the skin to heal faster.²²

The tripeptide glycyl-histidyl-lysine (GHK) is a good example of a matrikine. When it forms a complex with copper (II) ions (GHK–Cu) it can stimulate collagen and glycosaminoglycan synthesis²³ and increase tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases, TIMP-1 and TIMP-2, which play a role in wound remodeling.²⁴

A serum that contains tripeptide-1, hexapeptide-12, lactoferrin, and phosphatidyl serine has been shown to speed resolution of bruises and inflammation when applied after procedures. It is believed that these ingredients activate macrophages to clear hemosiderin from the skin.
 

Retinoids

Derived from vitamin A, the retinoid family includes compounds such as adapalene, retinol, tazarotene, trifarotene, and tretinoin. Retinoids should be used for at least 2-4 weeks prior to procedures to improve outcomes. Multiple studies have cogently revealed that pretreatment with tretinoin accelerates wound healing.^25-27 Kligman assessed healing after punch biopsy in the mid-1990s and found that the wounds on arms pretreated with tretinoin cream 0.05%-0.1% were significantly diminished by 35%-37% on days 1 and 4 and 47%-50% reduced on days 6, 8, and 11 as compared with the wounds on untreated arms.²⁸ A tretinoin pretreatment regimen of 2-4 weeks is supported by the preponderance of studies²⁹ because peak epidermal hypertrophy emerges after 7 days of tretinoin application and normalizes after 14 days of continued treatment.³⁰ Such an approach gives the skin time to recover from any retinoid dermatitis before the procedure is performed. Pretreatment with adapalene requires an earlier initiation period and should be introduced 5-6 weeks before procedures because it exhibits a longer half-life.³¹

Topical retinoids should not be used after a procedure until re-epithelialization is complete. Hung et al. applied 0.05% tretinoin cream daily for 10 days prior to partial-thickness skin wounding in a porcine model, with results revealing that re-epithelialization was accelerated with preprocedure treatment while use after the procedure slowed wound healing.³²

Skin care regimen design by procedure type

Procedures can be divided into six main types: nonablative, such as peels, intense pulsed light (IPL), and vascular or pigmented lasers; microneedling or other procedures that cause open channels into the dermis; injectables such as toxins and fillers; ablative, such as CO₂, erbium, and fractionated lasers; sutured wounds; and unsutured wounds. Skincare regimens that are prescribed before and after each of these procedures should take into account the Baumann Skin Type, the procedure type, whether it is pre- or postprocedure, and lifestyle issues such as sun exposure. Once the pre- and postprocedure regimen has been designed, patients should be given specific instructions as to which brands, the exact products, and the order in which to apply them.

Conclusion

To ensure the best outcomes from surgical treatments, patient education is a key step. The more that patients know and understand about the ways in which they can prepare for their procedure and treat their skin after the procedure, the better the results. Providers should give this type of information in an easy-to-follow printed instruction sheet because studies show that patients cannot remember most of the oral instructions offered by practitioners. Patients should be encouraged to ask questions during their consultation and procedure and to express any concerns with the practitioner’s office should any arise after they have returned home. These steps help improve patient compliance, satisfaction, and outcomes. Please discuss your opinions and experience with me on LinkedIn. You can also see a lecture on this topic on my website, SkinGuru.com.

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author, and entrepreneur who practices in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote two textbooks: “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002) and “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2014), as well as a New York Times Best Sellers book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Evolus, Galderma, and Revance. She is the founder and CEO of Skin Type Solutions Franchise Systems. Write to her at [email protected].

References

1. Murad S et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1981 May;78(5):2879-82.

2. Tajima S, Pinnell SR. J Dermatol Sci. 1996 Mar;11(3):250-3.

3. Geesin JC et al. J Invest Dermatol. 1988 Apr;90(4):420-4.

4. Alster TS, West TB. Dermatol Surg. 1998 Mar;24(3):331-4.

5. Soltani-Arabshahi R et al. JAMA Dermatol. 2014 Jan;150(1):68-72.

6. Lough D et al. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 Nov;132(5):1159-71.

7. Hirsch T et al. J Gene Med. 2009 Mar;11(3):220-8.

8. Van Brunt J, Klausner A. Nat Biotechnol. 1988 Jan 1;6:25-30.

9. Lynch SE et al. J Clin Invest. 1989 Aug;84(2):640-6.

10. Wang F et al. Arch Dermatol. 2007 Feb;143(2):155-63.

11. Huang G, Huang H. Drug Deliv. 2018 Nov;25(1):766-72.

12. Celani LM. J Surg Clin Res. 2019 Oct. doi: 10.20398/jscr.v10i2.18825.

13. Yildirim S et al. J Periodontol. 2018 Jan;89(1):36-45.

14. Weigel PH et al. Ciba Found Symp. 1989;143:248-61; discussion 261-4, 281-5.

15. Basora JF et al. Am J Case Rep. 2014 May 9;15:199-202.

16. Okano Yet al. Exp Dermatol. 2003;12 Suppl 2:57-63.

17. Bernstein EF et al. Dermatol Surg. 2001 May;27(5):429-33.

18. Hood HL et al. Food Chem Toxicol. 1999 Nov;37(11):1105-11.

19. West TB, Alster TS. Dermatol Surg. 1999 Jan;25(1):15-7.

20. Maquart FX et al. M. Biochimie. 2005 Mar-Apr;87(3-4):353-60.

21. Pickart L et al. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:648108.

22. Widgerow AD et al. Aesthet Surg J. 2019 Apr 8;39 (Supplement 3):S103-11.

23. Maquart FX et al. FEBS Lett. 1988 Oct 10;238(2):343-6.

24. Siméon A et al. J Invest Dermatol. 1999 Jun;112(6):957-64.

25. Vagotis FL, Brundage SR. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1995 May-Jun;19(3):243-6.

26. Stuzin JM. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Mar;127(3):1343-5.

27. Elson ML. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1998 Aug;39:S79-81.

28. Popp C et al. Br J Dermatol. 1995 Jan;132(1):46-53.

29. Orringer JS et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2004 Dec;51(6):940-6.

30. Kim IH et al. J Korean Med Sci. 1996 Aug;11(4):335-41.

31. Basak PY et al. Eur J Dermatol. 2002 Mar-Apr;12(2):145-8.

32. Hung VC et al. Arch Dermatol. 1989 Jan;125(1):65-9.
 

Outcomes are improved when proper skincare is practiced before and after any type of dermatologic procedure. This column reviews cosmeceutical ingredients that may affect procedure results. It is important to support the healing events that follow procedures to maximize outcomes. These are ingredients commonly used before, during, and after procedures.

I will use the first person when I am expressing my personal opinion or experience versus data reported in published studies that I reference.
 

Ascorbic acid

Ascorbic acid (vitamin C) is an essential cofactor necessary for lysyl hydroxylase and prolyl hydroxylase to produce collagen. Many studies have demonstrated that the use of oral and topical ascorbic acid increases collagen production by fibroblasts.^1-3 Several different ascorbic acid products, varying greatly in quality, are available on the market.

Ascorbic acid is very sensitive to light and air exposure and does not penetrate well if not at a pH of 2 or 2.5. There are aqueous and lipophilic formulations. Some are produced from L-ascorbic acid, while others are made from ascorbyl palmitate, or salts such as calcium ascorbate, magnesium ascorbate, magnesium ascorbyl phosphate, sodium ascorbate, and sodium ascorbyl phosphate. Consequently, one must closely evaluate any chosen ascorbic acid preparation and pay close attention to the form used in any studies. I am discussing ascorbic acid in general, but my statements only apply to properly formulated products. Most of the studies I quote used L-ascorbic acid, which is the form studied by the late Sheldon Pinnell, MD, who was an expert on ascorbic acid.

Properly formulated L-ascorbic acid products have a low pH. Unless formulated specifically to deter stinging, these low-pH preparations will sting wounded skin. For this reason, most ascorbic acid preparations should be avoided until the skin has completely re-epithelialized. I prefer using it preprocedure and after the procedure once the skin has re-epithelialized. Alster and West showed that use of ascorbic acid – in an aqueous solution formulated not to sting – after laser resurfacing resulted in a significant decrease in post‐CO₂ laser resurfacing erythema by the eighth postoperative week when compared with laser‐irradiated skin that had not received topical vitamin C.⁴

I prefer using ascorbic acid in patients before and after procedures involving fillers, toxins, skin tightening, and nonablative lasers. In my experience, this improves collagen production. Also, I use ascorbic acid before microneedling, but not during or after. Several case reports have cited allergic granulomatous reactions when ascorbic acid is used during microneedling procedures,⁵ although these reports did not involve aqueous formulations.


 

Defensin

2020 MetaBeauty Used with permission

Defensins are peptides that play an important role in wound repair. Defensin has exhibited the capacity to activate the leucine-rich repeat-containing G-protein–coupled receptors 5 and 6 (also known as LGR5+ and LGR6+) stem cells.⁶ This accelerates wound healing by stimulating LGR stem cells to form new keratinocytes that populate the epidermis.⁷ Using defensins prior to procedures would theoretically speed wound healing, but no studies have been published in this area. Anecdotally, it has been used after microneedling without complication. I have not used defensin in this situation, but when I have asked the audience during lectures, many practitioners have reported using it and found that it accelerates healing.

Growth factors

Growth factors are essential in the skin because they are responsible for immunomodulation, regulation of cell division, wound healing, and tissue generation.¹ There are several important growth factor families, including: transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-beta), epidermal growth factor (EGF), insulin-like growth factor (IGF), platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), and fibroblast growth factor (FGF).² Because of the numerous different variables that play a role with growth factor function, it is difficult to know exactly which combinations are the most helpful to improve outcomes after procedures. There is some evidence to support the use of FGF, TGF-beta, and EGF, IGF, and PDGF to hasten skin healing.^8,9 It is certain that growth factors play an important role in pre- and postprocedure skincare, but we do not yet know which growth factor combinations are the most effective.

Heparan sulfate

Heparan sulfate is a glycosaminoglycan found in the skin. Older cells are less responsive to growth factors than are younger cells; therefore, it is desirable to amplify the growth factor signal in older patients. Heparan sulfate has been shown to contribute to growth factors reaching the receptors on the cell surface and enhancing the cell’s ability to “hear” growth factor signals. Combining growth factors with enhancers such as heparan sulfate, defensins, ascorbic acid, and matrikines can improve outcomes of cosmetic procedures. There are not enough studies yet to substantiate which combinations are the most effective. However, I believe that if you are using a growth factor–containing product after a procedure, you should combine it with heparan sulfate to improve efficacy.

Heparan sulfate is not the same as the blood thinner heparin; however, it may affect clotting factors. It is prudent to stop heparan sulfate the day before a dermal filler procedure because of this theoretical risk. (I have not seen an increase in bruising in patients who use heparan sulfate prior to getting fillers.) I suggest using heparan sulfate–containing products with growth factors 24 hours after injecting fillers to try and enhance collagen synthesis that occurs after hyaluronic acid (HA) filler injections.¹⁰

Hyaluronic acid

Hyaluronic acid (HA) is known to increase penetration of drugs, as well as cosmeceutical ingredients.¹¹ For this reason, it is often used before a procedure to increase efficacy of growth factors. Many practitioners report using it during microneedling to help the device glide across the skin. I have not observed or heard of any reports of adverse events from using it during microneedling.

HA has been shown to accelerate wound healing in rats¹² and dental procedures.¹³ For this reason, it is often used after laser resurfacing and microneedling procedures and on sutured and open wounds. HA can vary in chain link and molecular weight and whether or not it is cross linked. These differences affect efficacy and should be taken into consideration when choosing an HA product. Some formulations combine various forms of HA. Because HA may increase bruising because of its effects on fibrin formation,¹⁴ I prefer not to use it 2 days prior to or the day of filler injections.¹⁵

Hydroxy acids

Pretreating skin with hydroxy acids increases dermal matrix formation,¹⁶ promotes collagen synthesis,¹⁷ and hastens stratum corneum turnover.¹⁸ Although postprocedure healing times after pretreatment with hydroxy acids has not been studied, it is very likely that pretreatment with hydroxy acids speeds healing time by increasing collagen production and cell turnover. West and Alster showed that pretreating skin with hydroxy acids prior to CO₂ resurfacing did not affect the incidence of postprocedure hyperpigmentation.¹⁹

Matrikines

Matrikines are peptides that occur when extracellular matrix (ECM) macromolecules are partially degraded. These peptides interact with cell surface receptors and activate intracellular signalling pathways to modulate ECM remodeling.²⁰ Matrikines, such as tripeptides and hexapeptides, have been shown to remove damaged collagen and elastin from the ECM.²¹ It is thought that these matrikines help to prepare the skin for procedures by freeing up space to allow room for newly formed collagen. Using matrikines at least 2 weeks before procedures may precondition the skin to heal faster.²²

The tripeptide glycyl-histidyl-lysine (GHK) is a good example of a matrikine. When it forms a complex with copper (II) ions (GHK–Cu) it can stimulate collagen and glycosaminoglycan synthesis²³ and increase tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases, TIMP-1 and TIMP-2, which play a role in wound remodeling.²⁴

A serum that contains tripeptide-1, hexapeptide-12, lactoferrin, and phosphatidyl serine has been shown to speed resolution of bruises and inflammation when applied after procedures. It is believed that these ingredients activate macrophages to clear hemosiderin from the skin.
 

Retinoids

Derived from vitamin A, the retinoid family includes compounds such as adapalene, retinol, tazarotene, trifarotene, and tretinoin. Retinoids should be used for at least 2-4 weeks prior to procedures to improve outcomes. Multiple studies have cogently revealed that pretreatment with tretinoin accelerates wound healing.^25-27 Kligman assessed healing after punch biopsy in the mid-1990s and found that the wounds on arms pretreated with tretinoin cream 0.05%-0.1% were significantly diminished by 35%-37% on days 1 and 4 and 47%-50% reduced on days 6, 8, and 11 as compared with the wounds on untreated arms.²⁸ A tretinoin pretreatment regimen of 2-4 weeks is supported by the preponderance of studies²⁹ because peak epidermal hypertrophy emerges after 7 days of tretinoin application and normalizes after 14 days of continued treatment.³⁰ Such an approach gives the skin time to recover from any retinoid dermatitis before the procedure is performed. Pretreatment with adapalene requires an earlier initiation period and should be introduced 5-6 weeks before procedures because it exhibits a longer half-life.³¹

Topical retinoids should not be used after a procedure until re-epithelialization is complete. Hung et al. applied 0.05% tretinoin cream daily for 10 days prior to partial-thickness skin wounding in a porcine model, with results revealing that re-epithelialization was accelerated with preprocedure treatment while use after the procedure slowed wound healing.³²

Skin care regimen design by procedure type

Procedures can be divided into six main types: nonablative, such as peels, intense pulsed light (IPL), and vascular or pigmented lasers; microneedling or other procedures that cause open channels into the dermis; injectables such as toxins and fillers; ablative, such as CO₂, erbium, and fractionated lasers; sutured wounds; and unsutured wounds. Skincare regimens that are prescribed before and after each of these procedures should take into account the Baumann Skin Type, the procedure type, whether it is pre- or postprocedure, and lifestyle issues such as sun exposure. Once the pre- and postprocedure regimen has been designed, patients should be given specific instructions as to which brands, the exact products, and the order in which to apply them.

Conclusion

To ensure the best outcomes from surgical treatments, patient education is a key step. The more that patients know and understand about the ways in which they can prepare for their procedure and treat their skin after the procedure, the better the results. Providers should give this type of information in an easy-to-follow printed instruction sheet because studies show that patients cannot remember most of the oral instructions offered by practitioners. Patients should be encouraged to ask questions during their consultation and procedure and to express any concerns with the practitioner’s office should any arise after they have returned home. These steps help improve patient compliance, satisfaction, and outcomes. Please discuss your opinions and experience with me on LinkedIn. You can also see a lecture on this topic on my website, SkinGuru.com.

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author, and entrepreneur who practices in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote two textbooks: “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002) and “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2014), as well as a New York Times Best Sellers book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Evolus, Galderma, and Revance. She is the founder and CEO of Skin Type Solutions Franchise Systems. Write to her at [email protected].

References

1. Murad S et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1981 May;78(5):2879-82.

2. Tajima S, Pinnell SR. J Dermatol Sci. 1996 Mar;11(3):250-3.

3. Geesin JC et al. J Invest Dermatol. 1988 Apr;90(4):420-4.

4. Alster TS, West TB. Dermatol Surg. 1998 Mar;24(3):331-4.

5. Soltani-Arabshahi R et al. JAMA Dermatol. 2014 Jan;150(1):68-72.

6. Lough D et al. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 Nov;132(5):1159-71.

7. Hirsch T et al. J Gene Med. 2009 Mar;11(3):220-8.

8. Van Brunt J, Klausner A. Nat Biotechnol. 1988 Jan 1;6:25-30.

9. Lynch SE et al. J Clin Invest. 1989 Aug;84(2):640-6.

10. Wang F et al. Arch Dermatol. 2007 Feb;143(2):155-63.

11. Huang G, Huang H. Drug Deliv. 2018 Nov;25(1):766-72.

12. Celani LM. J Surg Clin Res. 2019 Oct. doi: 10.20398/jscr.v10i2.18825.

13. Yildirim S et al. J Periodontol. 2018 Jan;89(1):36-45.

14. Weigel PH et al. Ciba Found Symp. 1989;143:248-61; discussion 261-4, 281-5.

15. Basora JF et al. Am J Case Rep. 2014 May 9;15:199-202.

16. Okano Yet al. Exp Dermatol. 2003;12 Suppl 2:57-63.

17. Bernstein EF et al. Dermatol Surg. 2001 May;27(5):429-33.

18. Hood HL et al. Food Chem Toxicol. 1999 Nov;37(11):1105-11.

19. West TB, Alster TS. Dermatol Surg. 1999 Jan;25(1):15-7.

20. Maquart FX et al. M. Biochimie. 2005 Mar-Apr;87(3-4):353-60.

21. Pickart L et al. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:648108.

22. Widgerow AD et al. Aesthet Surg J. 2019 Apr 8;39 (Supplement 3):S103-11.

23. Maquart FX et al. FEBS Lett. 1988 Oct 10;238(2):343-6.

24. Siméon A et al. J Invest Dermatol. 1999 Jun;112(6):957-64.

25. Vagotis FL, Brundage SR. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1995 May-Jun;19(3):243-6.

26. Stuzin JM. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Mar;127(3):1343-5.

27. Elson ML. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1998 Aug;39:S79-81.

28. Popp C et al. Br J Dermatol. 1995 Jan;132(1):46-53.

29. Orringer JS et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2004 Dec;51(6):940-6.

30. Kim IH et al. J Korean Med Sci. 1996 Aug;11(4):335-41.

31. Basak PY et al. Eur J Dermatol. 2002 Mar-Apr;12(2):145-8.

32. Hung VC et al. Arch Dermatol. 1989 Jan;125(1):65-9.
 

Fitzpatrick skin type (FST) is the most commonly used classification system in dermatologic practice. It was developed by Thomas B. Fitzpatrick, MD, PhD, in 1975 to assess the propensity of the skin to burn during phototherapy.¹ Fitzpatrick skin type also can be used to assess the clinical benefits and efficacy of cosmetic procedures, including laser hair removal, chemical peel and dermabrasion, tattoo removal, spray tanning, and laser resurfacing for acne scarring.² The original FST classifications included skin types I through IV; skin types V and VI were later added to include individuals of Asian, Indian, and African origin.¹ As a result, FST often is used by providers as a means of describing constitutive skin color and ethnicity.³

How did FST transition from describing the propensity of the skin to burn from UV light exposure to categorizing skin color, thereby becoming a proxy for race? It most likely occurred because there has not been another widely adopted classification system for describing skin color that can be applied to all skin types. Even when the FST classification scale is used as intended, there are inconsistencies with its accuracy; for example, self-reported FSTs have correlated poorly with sunburn risk as well as physician-reported FSTs.^4,5 Although physician-reported FSTs have been demonstrated to correlate with race, race does not consistently correlate with objective measures of pigmentation or self-reported FSTs.⁵ For example, Japanese women often self-identify as FST type II, but Asian skin generally is considered to be nonwhite.¹ Fitzpatrick himself acknowledged that race and ethnicity are cultural and political terms with no scientific basis.⁶ Fitzpatrick skin type also has been demonstrated to correlate poorly with constitutive skin color and minimal erythema dose values.⁷

We conducted an anonymous survey of dermatologists and dermatology trainees to evaluate how providers use FST in their clinical practice as well as how it is used to describe race and ethnicity.

Methods

The survey was distributed electronically to dermatologists and dermatology trainees from March 13 to March 28, 2019, using the Association of Professors of Dermatology listserv, as well as in person at the annual Skin of Color Society meeting in Washington, DC, on February 28, 2019. The 8-item survey included questions about physician demographics (ie, primary practice setting, board certification, and geographic location); whether the respondent identified as an individual with skin of color; and how the respondent utilized FST in clinical notes (ie, describing race/ethnicity, skin cancer risk, and constitutive [baseline] skin color; determining initial phototherapy dosage and suitability for laser treatments, and likelihood of skin burning). A t test was used to determine whether dermatologists who identified as having skin of color utilized FST differently.

Results

A total of 141 surveys were returned, and 140 respondents were included in the final analysis. Given the methods used to distribute the survey, a response rate could not be calculated. The respondents included more board-certified dermatologists (70%) than dermatology trainees (30%). Ninety-three percent of respondents indicated an academic institution as their primary practice location. Notably, 26% of respondents self-identified as having skin of color.

Forty-one percent of all respondents agreed that FST should be included in their clinical documentation. In response to the question “In what scenarios would you refer to FST in a clinical note?” 31% said they used FST to describe patients’ race or ethnicity, 47% used it to describe patients’ constitutive skin color, and 22% utilized it in both scenarios. Respondents who did not identify as having skin of color were more likely to use FST to describe constitutive skin color, though this finding was not statistically significant (P=.063). Anecdotally, providers also included FST in clinical notes on postinflammatory hyperpigmentation, melasma, and treatment with cryotherapy.

Comment

The US Census Bureau has estimated that half of the US population will be of non-European descent by 2050.⁸ As racial and ethnic distinctions continue to be blurred, attempts to include all nonwhite skin types under the umbrella term skin of color becomes increasingly problematic. The true number of skin colors is unknown but likely is infinite, as Brazilian artist Angélica Dass has demonstrated with her photographic project “Humanae” (Figure). Given this shift in demographics and the limitations of the FST, alternative methods of describing skin color must be developed.

The results of our survey suggest that approximately one-third to half of academic dermatologists/dermatology trainees use FST to describe race/ethnicity and/or constitutive skin color. This misuse of FST may occur more frequently among physicians who do not identify as having skin of color. Additionally, misuse of FST in academic settings may be problematic and confusing for medical students who may learn to use this common dermatologic tool outside of its original intent.

We acknowledge that the conundrum of how to classify individuals with nonwhite skin or skin of color is not simply answered. Several alternative skin classification models have been proposed to improve the sensitivity and specificity of identifying patients with skin of color (Table). Refining FST classification is one approach. Employing terms such as skin irritation, tenderness, itching, or skin becoming darker from sun exposure rather than painful burn or tanning may result in better identification.^1,4 A study conducted in India modified the FST questionnaire to acknowledge cultural behaviors.¹⁵ Because lighter skin is culturally valued in this population, patient experience with purposeful sun exposure was limited; thus, the questionnaire was modified to remove questions on the use of tanning booths and/or creams as well as sun exposure and instead included more objective questions regarding dark brown eye color, black and dark brown hair color, and dark brown skin color.¹⁵ Other studies have suggested that patient-reported photosensitivity assessed via a questionnaire is a valid measure for assessing FST but is associated with an overestimation of skin color, known as “the dark shift.”²⁰

Conclusion

Other investigators have criticized the various limitations of FST, including physician vs patient assessment, interview vs questionnaire, and phrasing of questions on skin type.²³ Our findings suggest that medical providers should be cognizant of conflating race and ethnicity with FST. Two authors of this report (O.R.W. and J.E.D.) are medical students with skin of color and frequently have observed the addition of FST to the medical records of patients who were not receiving phototherapy as a proxy for race. We believe that more culturally appropriate and clinically relevant methods for describing skin of color need to be developed and, in the interim, the original intent of FST should be emphasized and incorporated in medical school and resident education.

Acknowledgment
The authors thank Adewole Adamson, MD (Austin, Texas), for discussion and feedback.

Fitzpatrick skin type (FST) is the most commonly used classification system in dermatologic practice. It was developed by Thomas B. Fitzpatrick, MD, PhD, in 1975 to assess the propensity of the skin to burn during phototherapy.¹ Fitzpatrick skin type also can be used to assess the clinical benefits and efficacy of cosmetic procedures, including laser hair removal, chemical peel and dermabrasion, tattoo removal, spray tanning, and laser resurfacing for acne scarring.² The original FST classifications included skin types I through IV; skin types V and VI were later added to include individuals of Asian, Indian, and African origin.¹ As a result, FST often is used by providers as a means of describing constitutive skin color and ethnicity.³

How did FST transition from describing the propensity of the skin to burn from UV light exposure to categorizing skin color, thereby becoming a proxy for race? It most likely occurred because there has not been another widely adopted classification system for describing skin color that can be applied to all skin types. Even when the FST classification scale is used as intended, there are inconsistencies with its accuracy; for example, self-reported FSTs have correlated poorly with sunburn risk as well as physician-reported FSTs.^4,5 Although physician-reported FSTs have been demonstrated to correlate with race, race does not consistently correlate with objective measures of pigmentation or self-reported FSTs.⁵ For example, Japanese women often self-identify as FST type II, but Asian skin generally is considered to be nonwhite.¹ Fitzpatrick himself acknowledged that race and ethnicity are cultural and political terms with no scientific basis.⁶ Fitzpatrick skin type also has been demonstrated to correlate poorly with constitutive skin color and minimal erythema dose values.⁷

We conducted an anonymous survey of dermatologists and dermatology trainees to evaluate how providers use FST in their clinical practice as well as how it is used to describe race and ethnicity.

Methods

The survey was distributed electronically to dermatologists and dermatology trainees from March 13 to March 28, 2019, using the Association of Professors of Dermatology listserv, as well as in person at the annual Skin of Color Society meeting in Washington, DC, on February 28, 2019. The 8-item survey included questions about physician demographics (ie, primary practice setting, board certification, and geographic location); whether the respondent identified as an individual with skin of color; and how the respondent utilized FST in clinical notes (ie, describing race/ethnicity, skin cancer risk, and constitutive [baseline] skin color; determining initial phototherapy dosage and suitability for laser treatments, and likelihood of skin burning). A t test was used to determine whether dermatologists who identified as having skin of color utilized FST differently.

Results

A total of 141 surveys were returned, and 140 respondents were included in the final analysis. Given the methods used to distribute the survey, a response rate could not be calculated. The respondents included more board-certified dermatologists (70%) than dermatology trainees (30%). Ninety-three percent of respondents indicated an academic institution as their primary practice location. Notably, 26% of respondents self-identified as having skin of color.

Forty-one percent of all respondents agreed that FST should be included in their clinical documentation. In response to the question “In what scenarios would you refer to FST in a clinical note?” 31% said they used FST to describe patients’ race or ethnicity, 47% used it to describe patients’ constitutive skin color, and 22% utilized it in both scenarios. Respondents who did not identify as having skin of color were more likely to use FST to describe constitutive skin color, though this finding was not statistically significant (P=.063). Anecdotally, providers also included FST in clinical notes on postinflammatory hyperpigmentation, melasma, and treatment with cryotherapy.

Comment

The US Census Bureau has estimated that half of the US population will be of non-European descent by 2050.⁸ As racial and ethnic distinctions continue to be blurred, attempts to include all nonwhite skin types under the umbrella term skin of color becomes increasingly problematic. The true number of skin colors is unknown but likely is infinite, as Brazilian artist Angélica Dass has demonstrated with her photographic project “Humanae” (Figure). Given this shift in demographics and the limitations of the FST, alternative methods of describing skin color must be developed.

The results of our survey suggest that approximately one-third to half of academic dermatologists/dermatology trainees use FST to describe race/ethnicity and/or constitutive skin color. This misuse of FST may occur more frequently among physicians who do not identify as having skin of color. Additionally, misuse of FST in academic settings may be problematic and confusing for medical students who may learn to use this common dermatologic tool outside of its original intent.

We acknowledge that the conundrum of how to classify individuals with nonwhite skin or skin of color is not simply answered. Several alternative skin classification models have been proposed to improve the sensitivity and specificity of identifying patients with skin of color (Table). Refining FST classification is one approach. Employing terms such as skin irritation, tenderness, itching, or skin becoming darker from sun exposure rather than painful burn or tanning may result in better identification.^1,4 A study conducted in India modified the FST questionnaire to acknowledge cultural behaviors.¹⁵ Because lighter skin is culturally valued in this population, patient experience with purposeful sun exposure was limited; thus, the questionnaire was modified to remove questions on the use of tanning booths and/or creams as well as sun exposure and instead included more objective questions regarding dark brown eye color, black and dark brown hair color, and dark brown skin color.¹⁵ Other studies have suggested that patient-reported photosensitivity assessed via a questionnaire is a valid measure for assessing FST but is associated with an overestimation of skin color, known as “the dark shift.”²⁰

Conclusion

Other investigators have criticized the various limitations of FST, including physician vs patient assessment, interview vs questionnaire, and phrasing of questions on skin type.²³ Our findings suggest that medical providers should be cognizant of conflating race and ethnicity with FST. Two authors of this report (O.R.W. and J.E.D.) are medical students with skin of color and frequently have observed the addition of FST to the medical records of patients who were not receiving phototherapy as a proxy for race. We believe that more culturally appropriate and clinically relevant methods for describing skin of color need to be developed and, in the interim, the original intent of FST should be emphasized and incorporated in medical school and resident education.

Acknowledgment
The authors thank Adewole Adamson, MD (Austin, Texas), for discussion and feedback.

Fitzpatrick skin type (FST) is the most commonly used classification system in dermatologic practice. It was developed by Thomas B. Fitzpatrick, MD, PhD, in 1975 to assess the propensity of the skin to burn during phototherapy.¹ Fitzpatrick skin type also can be used to assess the clinical benefits and efficacy of cosmetic procedures, including laser hair removal, chemical peel and dermabrasion, tattoo removal, spray tanning, and laser resurfacing for acne scarring.² The original FST classifications included skin types I through IV; skin types V and VI were later added to include individuals of Asian, Indian, and African origin.¹ As a result, FST often is used by providers as a means of describing constitutive skin color and ethnicity.³

How did FST transition from describing the propensity of the skin to burn from UV light exposure to categorizing skin color, thereby becoming a proxy for race? It most likely occurred because there has not been another widely adopted classification system for describing skin color that can be applied to all skin types. Even when the FST classification scale is used as intended, there are inconsistencies with its accuracy; for example, self-reported FSTs have correlated poorly with sunburn risk as well as physician-reported FSTs.^4,5 Although physician-reported FSTs have been demonstrated to correlate with race, race does not consistently correlate with objective measures of pigmentation or self-reported FSTs.⁵ For example, Japanese women often self-identify as FST type II, but Asian skin generally is considered to be nonwhite.¹ Fitzpatrick himself acknowledged that race and ethnicity are cultural and political terms with no scientific basis.⁶ Fitzpatrick skin type also has been demonstrated to correlate poorly with constitutive skin color and minimal erythema dose values.⁷

We conducted an anonymous survey of dermatologists and dermatology trainees to evaluate how providers use FST in their clinical practice as well as how it is used to describe race and ethnicity.

Methods

The survey was distributed electronically to dermatologists and dermatology trainees from March 13 to March 28, 2019, using the Association of Professors of Dermatology listserv, as well as in person at the annual Skin of Color Society meeting in Washington, DC, on February 28, 2019. The 8-item survey included questions about physician demographics (ie, primary practice setting, board certification, and geographic location); whether the respondent identified as an individual with skin of color; and how the respondent utilized FST in clinical notes (ie, describing race/ethnicity, skin cancer risk, and constitutive [baseline] skin color; determining initial phototherapy dosage and suitability for laser treatments, and likelihood of skin burning). A t test was used to determine whether dermatologists who identified as having skin of color utilized FST differently.

Results

A total of 141 surveys were returned, and 140 respondents were included in the final analysis. Given the methods used to distribute the survey, a response rate could not be calculated. The respondents included more board-certified dermatologists (70%) than dermatology trainees (30%). Ninety-three percent of respondents indicated an academic institution as their primary practice location. Notably, 26% of respondents self-identified as having skin of color.

Forty-one percent of all respondents agreed that FST should be included in their clinical documentation. In response to the question “In what scenarios would you refer to FST in a clinical note?” 31% said they used FST to describe patients’ race or ethnicity, 47% used it to describe patients’ constitutive skin color, and 22% utilized it in both scenarios. Respondents who did not identify as having skin of color were more likely to use FST to describe constitutive skin color, though this finding was not statistically significant (P=.063). Anecdotally, providers also included FST in clinical notes on postinflammatory hyperpigmentation, melasma, and treatment with cryotherapy.

Comment

The US Census Bureau has estimated that half of the US population will be of non-European descent by 2050.⁸ As racial and ethnic distinctions continue to be blurred, attempts to include all nonwhite skin types under the umbrella term skin of color becomes increasingly problematic. The true number of skin colors is unknown but likely is infinite, as Brazilian artist Angélica Dass has demonstrated with her photographic project “Humanae” (Figure). Given this shift in demographics and the limitations of the FST, alternative methods of describing skin color must be developed.

The results of our survey suggest that approximately one-third to half of academic dermatologists/dermatology trainees use FST to describe race/ethnicity and/or constitutive skin color. This misuse of FST may occur more frequently among physicians who do not identify as having skin of color. Additionally, misuse of FST in academic settings may be problematic and confusing for medical students who may learn to use this common dermatologic tool outside of its original intent.

We acknowledge that the conundrum of how to classify individuals with nonwhite skin or skin of color is not simply answered. Several alternative skin classification models have been proposed to improve the sensitivity and specificity of identifying patients with skin of color (Table). Refining FST classification is one approach. Employing terms such as skin irritation, tenderness, itching, or skin becoming darker from sun exposure rather than painful burn or tanning may result in better identification.^1,4 A study conducted in India modified the FST questionnaire to acknowledge cultural behaviors.¹⁵ Because lighter skin is culturally valued in this population, patient experience with purposeful sun exposure was limited; thus, the questionnaire was modified to remove questions on the use of tanning booths and/or creams as well as sun exposure and instead included more objective questions regarding dark brown eye color, black and dark brown hair color, and dark brown skin color.¹⁵ Other studies have suggested that patient-reported photosensitivity assessed via a questionnaire is a valid measure for assessing FST but is associated with an overestimation of skin color, known as “the dark shift.”²⁰

Conclusion

Other investigators have criticized the various limitations of FST, including physician vs patient assessment, interview vs questionnaire, and phrasing of questions on skin type.²³ Our findings suggest that medical providers should be cognizant of conflating race and ethnicity with FST. Two authors of this report (O.R.W. and J.E.D.) are medical students with skin of color and frequently have observed the addition of FST to the medical records of patients who were not receiving phototherapy as a proxy for race. We believe that more culturally appropriate and clinically relevant methods for describing skin of color need to be developed and, in the interim, the original intent of FST should be emphasized and incorporated in medical school and resident education.

Acknowledgment
The authors thank Adewole Adamson, MD (Austin, Texas), for discussion and feedback.

A small survey suggests many patients consult social media for advice on acne treatment and follow recommendations that don’t align with clinical guidelines.

llhedgehogll/Thinkstock

Of the 130 patients surveyed, 45% consulted social media for advice on acne treatment, and 52% of those patients followed recommendations that don’t correspond to American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) guidelines. Most patients reported no improvement (40%) or minimal improvement (53%) in their acne after following advice from social media.

“These results suggest that dermatologists should inquire about social media acne treatment advice and directly address misinformation,” wrote Ahmed Yousaf, of West Virginia University, Morgantown, W.Va., and colleagues. Their report is in Pediatric Dermatology.

They conducted the survey of 130 patients treated for acne at West Virginia University. Most patients were female (60%), and a majority were adolescents (54%) or adults (44%). About half of the patients (51%) said their acne was moderate, 38% said it was severe, and 11% said it was mild.

Most patients said they consulted a medical professional for their first acne treatment (58%). However, 16% of patients said they first went to social media for advice, 26% said they consulted family or friends, and 10% took “other” steps as their first approach to acne treatment.

In all, 45% of patients consulted social media for acne treatment advice at some point. This includes 54% of women, 31% of men, 41% of adolescents, and 51% of adults. Social media consultation was more common among patients with severe acne (54%) than among those with mild (36%) or moderate (39%) acne.

The most common social media platforms used were YouTube and Instagram (58% each), followed by Pinterest (31%), Facebook (19%), Twitter (9%), Snapchat (7%), and Tumblr (3%). (Patients could select more than one social media platform.)

Roughly half (52%) of patients who consulted social media followed advice that does not align with AAD guidelines, 31% made changes that are recommended by the AAD, and 17% did not provide information on recommendations they followed.

The social media advice patients followed included using over-the-counter products (81%), making dietary changes (40%), using self-made products (19%), taking supplements (16%), and making changes in exercise routines (7%). (Patients could select more than one treatment approach.)

Among the patients who followed social media advice, 40% said they saw no change in their acne, and 53% reported minimal improvement.

“Only 7% of social media users reported significant improvement in their acne,” Mr. Yousaf and colleagues wrote. “This may be due to less accurate content found on social media compared to other health care sources.”

The authors acknowledged that the patients surveyed were recruited from a dermatology clinic. Therefore, these results “likely underestimate the percentage of patients who improve from social media acne treatment advice and do not consult a medical professional.”

Mr. Yousaf and colleagues did not disclose any conflicts of interest.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Yousaf A et al. Pediatr Dermatol. 2020 Jan 15. doi: 10.1111/pde.14091.

A small survey suggests many patients consult social media for advice on acne treatment and follow recommendations that don’t align with clinical guidelines.

llhedgehogll/Thinkstock

Of the 130 patients surveyed, 45% consulted social media for advice on acne treatment, and 52% of those patients followed recommendations that don’t correspond to American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) guidelines. Most patients reported no improvement (40%) or minimal improvement (53%) in their acne after following advice from social media.

“These results suggest that dermatologists should inquire about social media acne treatment advice and directly address misinformation,” wrote Ahmed Yousaf, of West Virginia University, Morgantown, W.Va., and colleagues. Their report is in Pediatric Dermatology.

They conducted the survey of 130 patients treated for acne at West Virginia University. Most patients were female (60%), and a majority were adolescents (54%) or adults (44%). About half of the patients (51%) said their acne was moderate, 38% said it was severe, and 11% said it was mild.

Most patients said they consulted a medical professional for their first acne treatment (58%). However, 16% of patients said they first went to social media for advice, 26% said they consulted family or friends, and 10% took “other” steps as their first approach to acne treatment.

In all, 45% of patients consulted social media for acne treatment advice at some point. This includes 54% of women, 31% of men, 41% of adolescents, and 51% of adults. Social media consultation was more common among patients with severe acne (54%) than among those with mild (36%) or moderate (39%) acne.

The most common social media platforms used were YouTube and Instagram (58% each), followed by Pinterest (31%), Facebook (19%), Twitter (9%), Snapchat (7%), and Tumblr (3%). (Patients could select more than one social media platform.)

Roughly half (52%) of patients who consulted social media followed advice that does not align with AAD guidelines, 31% made changes that are recommended by the AAD, and 17% did not provide information on recommendations they followed.

The social media advice patients followed included using over-the-counter products (81%), making dietary changes (40%), using self-made products (19%), taking supplements (16%), and making changes in exercise routines (7%). (Patients could select more than one treatment approach.)

Among the patients who followed social media advice, 40% said they saw no change in their acne, and 53% reported minimal improvement.

“Only 7% of social media users reported significant improvement in their acne,” Mr. Yousaf and colleagues wrote. “This may be due to less accurate content found on social media compared to other health care sources.”

The authors acknowledged that the patients surveyed were recruited from a dermatology clinic. Therefore, these results “likely underestimate the percentage of patients who improve from social media acne treatment advice and do not consult a medical professional.”

Mr. Yousaf and colleagues did not disclose any conflicts of interest.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Yousaf A et al. Pediatr Dermatol. 2020 Jan 15. doi: 10.1111/pde.14091.

A small survey suggests many patients consult social media for advice on acne treatment and follow recommendations that don’t align with clinical guidelines.

llhedgehogll/Thinkstock

Of the 130 patients surveyed, 45% consulted social media for advice on acne treatment, and 52% of those patients followed recommendations that don’t correspond to American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) guidelines. Most patients reported no improvement (40%) or minimal improvement (53%) in their acne after following advice from social media.

“These results suggest that dermatologists should inquire about social media acne treatment advice and directly address misinformation,” wrote Ahmed Yousaf, of West Virginia University, Morgantown, W.Va., and colleagues. Their report is in Pediatric Dermatology.

They conducted the survey of 130 patients treated for acne at West Virginia University. Most patients were female (60%), and a majority were adolescents (54%) or adults (44%). About half of the patients (51%) said their acne was moderate, 38% said it was severe, and 11% said it was mild.

Most patients said they consulted a medical professional for their first acne treatment (58%). However, 16% of patients said they first went to social media for advice, 26% said they consulted family or friends, and 10% took “other” steps as their first approach to acne treatment.

In all, 45% of patients consulted social media for acne treatment advice at some point. This includes 54% of women, 31% of men, 41% of adolescents, and 51% of adults. Social media consultation was more common among patients with severe acne (54%) than among those with mild (36%) or moderate (39%) acne.

The most common social media platforms used were YouTube and Instagram (58% each), followed by Pinterest (31%), Facebook (19%), Twitter (9%), Snapchat (7%), and Tumblr (3%). (Patients could select more than one social media platform.)

Roughly half (52%) of patients who consulted social media followed advice that does not align with AAD guidelines, 31% made changes that are recommended by the AAD, and 17% did not provide information on recommendations they followed.

The social media advice patients followed included using over-the-counter products (81%), making dietary changes (40%), using self-made products (19%), taking supplements (16%), and making changes in exercise routines (7%). (Patients could select more than one treatment approach.)

Among the patients who followed social media advice, 40% said they saw no change in their acne, and 53% reported minimal improvement.

“Only 7% of social media users reported significant improvement in their acne,” Mr. Yousaf and colleagues wrote. “This may be due to less accurate content found on social media compared to other health care sources.”

The authors acknowledged that the patients surveyed were recruited from a dermatology clinic. Therefore, these results “likely underestimate the percentage of patients who improve from social media acne treatment advice and do not consult a medical professional.”

Mr. Yousaf and colleagues did not disclose any conflicts of interest.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Yousaf A et al. Pediatr Dermatol. 2020 Jan 15. doi: 10.1111/pde.14091.

Picosecond and Q-switched (QS) lasers are safe and effective for removing tattoos from the oral mucosa, according to results of two recent cases, researchers reported.

Mucocutaneous tattoos are relatively rare, and lasers have been used for their removal, but cases and results have not been well documented, wrote Hao Feng, MD, then of the Laser & Skin Surgery Center of New York, and the department of dermatology, New York University, and coauthors.

In a report published in Lasers in Surgery and Medicine, the clinicians noted significant improvement with no scarring or dyspigmentation at 1 month after the last treatment session in two patients, with mucosal tattoos that had not been previously treated.

In one case, a healthy 19-year-old woman with Fitzpatrick skin type II presented for removal of a 6‐month‐old, black tattoo on the mucosal surface of her lower lip. She received six treatment sessions at months 0, 1, 3, 5, 7, and 12 with a QS 694‐nm ruby laser at settings of 6-mm spot size, 20-nanosecond pulse duration, and 3.0-3.5 J/cm².

In a second case, a 30‐year‐old man with Fitzpatrick skin type IV presented for removal of a 10‐year‐old black tattoo on his left buccal mucosa. He received one treatment with 755-nm alexandrite picosecond lasers at settings of 2.5-mm spot size, 500-picosecond pulse duration, and 3.36 J/cm².

Both patients experienced local mild discomfort, erythema, and edema after treatment.

“Older tattoos respond better and quicker on the skin to laser treatments, and it is likely the reason why the buccal mucosa tattoo (10 years) resolved with a single treatment whereas the lower lip tattoo (6 months) required six treatments,” the authors noted.

Mucosal tattoos, they added, “tend to respond better, faster, and with less unwanted side effects than tattoos on the skin. This may relate to the fact that mucosal skin is thinner, non-keratinized, well‐vascularized, and contains less melanin content.”

As to which laser is the best choice for removing mucosal tattoos, the authors noted that it is unclear, but while they said they have been using picosecond lasers for tattoo removals, QS lasers “remain excellent treatment modalities,” they wrote.

“Given the excellent clinical response combined with lack of scarring and dyspigmentation in our highly satisfied patients, it is the authors’ opinion that laser treatment should be considered as the first‐line treatment in removing unwanted cosmetic mucosal tattoos. This can be accomplished with various wavelengths in the picosecond and nanosecond domains,” they concluded.

Dr. Feng, who is now director of laser surgery and cosmetic dermatology at the University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, disclosed serving as a consultant and medical monitor for Cytrellis Biosystems. Another author disclosed serving on the advisory boards for Cytrellis, Syneron Candela, and Cynosure; owning stocks or having stock options with Cytrellis; and investing in Syneron Candela, Cynosure, and Cytrellis. The remaining two authors had no disclosures.

SOURCE: Feng H et al. Lasers Surg Med. 2019 Dec 30. doi: 10.1002/lsm.23207.

Picosecond and Q-switched (QS) lasers are safe and effective for removing tattoos from the oral mucosa, according to results of two recent cases, researchers reported.

Mucocutaneous tattoos are relatively rare, and lasers have been used for their removal, but cases and results have not been well documented, wrote Hao Feng, MD, then of the Laser & Skin Surgery Center of New York, and the department of dermatology, New York University, and coauthors.

In a report published in Lasers in Surgery and Medicine, the clinicians noted significant improvement with no scarring or dyspigmentation at 1 month after the last treatment session in two patients, with mucosal tattoos that had not been previously treated.

In one case, a healthy 19-year-old woman with Fitzpatrick skin type II presented for removal of a 6‐month‐old, black tattoo on the mucosal surface of her lower lip. She received six treatment sessions at months 0, 1, 3, 5, 7, and 12 with a QS 694‐nm ruby laser at settings of 6-mm spot size, 20-nanosecond pulse duration, and 3.0-3.5 J/cm².

In a second case, a 30‐year‐old man with Fitzpatrick skin type IV presented for removal of a 10‐year‐old black tattoo on his left buccal mucosa. He received one treatment with 755-nm alexandrite picosecond lasers at settings of 2.5-mm spot size, 500-picosecond pulse duration, and 3.36 J/cm².

Both patients experienced local mild discomfort, erythema, and edema after treatment.

“Older tattoos respond better and quicker on the skin to laser treatments, and it is likely the reason why the buccal mucosa tattoo (10 years) resolved with a single treatment whereas the lower lip tattoo (6 months) required six treatments,” the authors noted.

Mucosal tattoos, they added, “tend to respond better, faster, and with less unwanted side effects than tattoos on the skin. This may relate to the fact that mucosal skin is thinner, non-keratinized, well‐vascularized, and contains less melanin content.”

As to which laser is the best choice for removing mucosal tattoos, the authors noted that it is unclear, but while they said they have been using picosecond lasers for tattoo removals, QS lasers “remain excellent treatment modalities,” they wrote.

“Given the excellent clinical response combined with lack of scarring and dyspigmentation in our highly satisfied patients, it is the authors’ opinion that laser treatment should be considered as the first‐line treatment in removing unwanted cosmetic mucosal tattoos. This can be accomplished with various wavelengths in the picosecond and nanosecond domains,” they concluded.

Dr. Feng, who is now director of laser surgery and cosmetic dermatology at the University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, disclosed serving as a consultant and medical monitor for Cytrellis Biosystems. Another author disclosed serving on the advisory boards for Cytrellis, Syneron Candela, and Cynosure; owning stocks or having stock options with Cytrellis; and investing in Syneron Candela, Cynosure, and Cytrellis. The remaining two authors had no disclosures.

SOURCE: Feng H et al. Lasers Surg Med. 2019 Dec 30. doi: 10.1002/lsm.23207.

Picosecond and Q-switched (QS) lasers are safe and effective for removing tattoos from the oral mucosa, according to results of two recent cases, researchers reported.

Mucocutaneous tattoos are relatively rare, and lasers have been used for their removal, but cases and results have not been well documented, wrote Hao Feng, MD, then of the Laser & Skin Surgery Center of New York, and the department of dermatology, New York University, and coauthors.

In a report published in Lasers in Surgery and Medicine, the clinicians noted significant improvement with no scarring or dyspigmentation at 1 month after the last treatment session in two patients, with mucosal tattoos that had not been previously treated.

In one case, a healthy 19-year-old woman with Fitzpatrick skin type II presented for removal of a 6‐month‐old, black tattoo on the mucosal surface of her lower lip. She received six treatment sessions at months 0, 1, 3, 5, 7, and 12 with a QS 694‐nm ruby laser at settings of 6-mm spot size, 20-nanosecond pulse duration, and 3.0-3.5 J/cm².

In a second case, a 30‐year‐old man with Fitzpatrick skin type IV presented for removal of a 10‐year‐old black tattoo on his left buccal mucosa. He received one treatment with 755-nm alexandrite picosecond lasers at settings of 2.5-mm spot size, 500-picosecond pulse duration, and 3.36 J/cm².

Both patients experienced local mild discomfort, erythema, and edema after treatment.

“Older tattoos respond better and quicker on the skin to laser treatments, and it is likely the reason why the buccal mucosa tattoo (10 years) resolved with a single treatment whereas the lower lip tattoo (6 months) required six treatments,” the authors noted.

Mucosal tattoos, they added, “tend to respond better, faster, and with less unwanted side effects than tattoos on the skin. This may relate to the fact that mucosal skin is thinner, non-keratinized, well‐vascularized, and contains less melanin content.”

As to which laser is the best choice for removing mucosal tattoos, the authors noted that it is unclear, but while they said they have been using picosecond lasers for tattoo removals, QS lasers “remain excellent treatment modalities,” they wrote.

“Given the excellent clinical response combined with lack of scarring and dyspigmentation in our highly satisfied patients, it is the authors’ opinion that laser treatment should be considered as the first‐line treatment in removing unwanted cosmetic mucosal tattoos. This can be accomplished with various wavelengths in the picosecond and nanosecond domains,” they concluded.

Dr. Feng, who is now director of laser surgery and cosmetic dermatology at the University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, disclosed serving as a consultant and medical monitor for Cytrellis Biosystems. Another author disclosed serving on the advisory boards for Cytrellis, Syneron Candela, and Cynosure; owning stocks or having stock options with Cytrellis; and investing in Syneron Candela, Cynosure, and Cytrellis. The remaining two authors had no disclosures.

SOURCE: Feng H et al. Lasers Surg Med. 2019 Dec 30. doi: 10.1002/lsm.23207.