IPL: Stories
Write a ReviewWould NOT Recomment IPL for Freckles and Sun Spots
- 2540anon
- posted 3 years ago
- updated 2 years ago
- Not Worth It
- Cost: $600
- James J. Cui, MD, PhD (Flushing, NY)
Went to dermatologist for consult about having...
- 23 May 2010
Went to dermatologist for consult about having some freckles & sun spots removed. After a quick look at my face, the doctor said he could remove everything with 1 session of IPL for $600. I'd become increasingly self-conscious of minor blemishes and dark spots left behind by sun damage and acne. I said I wanted to do it. The doctor told the nurse to prep me right away. I stopped him saying I had to work tomorrow (I bartend), and since the recovery time is 1-2 wks, I should reschedule. He brushed it off saying I should be fine tomorrow, it was minor &I'd be able to work. His nurse chimed in repeating the same. I was reluctantly persuaded to have it done that day.
They numbed my face and right before the precedure was done, the nurse handed me a short 1 page consent and disclaimer form to sign. She seemed put out when I insisted on reading it first. I had it done.
Aftercare- I had to prompt for insturctions beyond bacitracin oinment and no lotion for 2 weeks. I asked about make-up since they said I sould work the next day. She wasn't sure.
Needless to say I couldn't work the next day, or the one after that, or the one after that. I've lost 4 days work, (5 shifts) so far and will lose at least one more. So the real cost of this procedure is actually easily twice what I paid. Add to it, my face is now swollen, blotchy and patchy, this has NOT been a good experience. I am afraid my face is going to end up worse off than it was before as the spots seem to be forming dark pigments on my skin (after the original spot was shed).
Can anyone take a look and let me know if I should be worried. The last pictures are of day 5 after. I seem to lood worse and worse.
Absolutely no aftercare. I had to do everything...
- 14 Feb 2011
Great review?
My Doctor: James J. Cui, MD, PhD
My rating:
He and his nurse just wanted my money. Despite my protest that I had to work the next day, they went back on their word about 1-2 week recovery period and said I'd be fine the next day. I was not fine and have lost a lot of money losing a week of work. And my face doesn't seem to be healing right. It's swollen and splotchy and rough.
Comments (76)
Sort by
Ouh,,,,,im so sorry,,i was just considering to do this treatment, now,,and thats before my wedding I'm sooo over it after all this negative comments...i already had a bad experience after my second restylane treatment under eye.,first was good ,,second look like too much and now I've got bags,,the same lady at the med,spa,who did my eyes,recommended the ill..i have very mild rosacea that i can cover easy when make up on,,no wrinkles,and very few open pores on chick,just dry skin,,,so I'm considering a less invasive treatment,,,maybe a micro derma abrasion?or just nice mask,,scrub moisturizing treatment before wedding and thats it!!im afraid we women fall often into the trap of vanity,,,and many of us don't accept what we are,,and don't realize until we do something like this that damage us,and we think,was it worth it??by the way you seamed you didn't need a all a treatment,,why did u do it in first place??hope u heel soon!!greets from an italian living in finland
I'm so glad realself gives us every opportunity to ask questions, post concerns, encouragement or disencouragement at that, and most importantly allow people to provide experiences of our procedures without any kind of bias. That's what makes forums like these work;).
Good luck.
For those who don't know what this is, here the definition of lipid peroxidation (courtesy of Wikipedia):
"Lipid peroxidation refers to the oxidative degradation of lipids. It is the process in which free radicals "steal" electrons from the lipids in cell membranes, resulting in cell damage."
Lipid peroxidation is not a 'good thing', it is a negative thing. It is a purported 'side effect' of IPL, referred to in the previous posts I have provided. This doctor is using anti-oxidants in an attempt to counter act or mitigate the peroxidiation. Thus, by virtue of the fact that he went to the trouble to research and write a paper, he agrees and is inferring that there does in fact seem to be a negative issue with IPL in this lipid peroxidation process and he addresses it by using an anti-oxidant in an attempt to mitigate that negative side effect.
I don't know that anyone who's ever had IPL was told, and as you made mention in a prior post, of this negative lipid peroxidation potential prior to having IPL treatment, or that there's even a slight chance it is a side-effect of IPL.
Of course, I'm no scientist either but I did have my brother-in-law who is a molecular biologist read over some of the papers on this particular aspect (lipid peroxidation)of IPL and he stated he would not have nor would he suggest anyone have IPL treatments if lipid peroxidation is a side-effect or even a possible side-effect.
Further:
"If not terminated fast enough, there will be damage to the cell membrane, which consists mainly of lipids. Phototherapy may cause hemolysis by rupturing red blood cell cell membranes in this way[1]
In addition, end-products of lipid peroxidation may be mutagenic and carcinogenic.[2] For instance, the end-product malondialdehyde reacts with deoxyadenosine and deoxyguanosine in DNA, forming DNA adducts to them, primarily M1G".
This is not to say that IPL causes cancer or DNA damage, but if lipid peroxidation occurs or even if there is just the outside chance that it may occur during an IPL treatment, and iterative treatments are a part of the equation, is could very well be opening pathways that may not otherwise be opened. If I were informed of this I would avoid that possibility,thus not have IPL treatments.
My goal is to educate those who may not know about even the outside chance of lipid peroxidation, so they can make an informed decision prior to having an IPL treatment.
Those who read here now have the chance to mull over the scientific data I have made available. Do with it as they will. At least be informed of all sides of this issue, good/bad, positive/negative.
Like you stated you have done a great deal of research on IPL, as have I. I've posted the results above. I did not create this research, it was done by others, doctors and scientists alike, far more qualified than I am but at least it is out there now for others to read and make up their own minds.
And with this, I'm done on this subject. People will ultimately do as they please, but when they do I hope that after they read this information that they will at least be able to make a more informed decision.
I appreciate the opportunity to have a calm, exchange backed up by scientific research. Adieu.
However, in my opinion he's simply trying to improve on a procedure he's already supporting. It is in no way stating that people should cease to use IPL.
J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2009 Sep;11(3):142-5
"Intense pulsed light therapy (IPL) has been associated with erythema and increased lipid peroxidation. Polyphenolic antioxidants have been shown to decrease inflammation and reduce oxidative stress in irradiated skin. Objective: To determine whether the topical application of polyphenolic antioxidants to IPL-treated skin reduced the adverse effects of IPL exposure."
It begs the question whether any evidence to support its assertions of oxidative stress has been found since 2007.
I'm sure anti-IPL groups would have seized on any which back up this rather old and 'flash in the pan' article.
"The implication of this study is that IPL treatment may not be without consequences. Although IPL irradiation did not affect thymine dimer production because the light source does not emit in the UV range, it did produce considerable amounts of lipid peroxides, an indicator of oxidative stress. Oxidative stress has been associated with a number of deleterious effects; beyond premature aging of the skin, it has been shown to promote skin cancer in experimental animal models. Although these molecular studies do not necessarily mean that long-term adverse effects will ensue, the results point to our ignorance of IPL’s lasting effects. Many highly effective therapies have had adverse effects that were not fully identified until years after regulatory approval. Until IPL has been in active use for a while longer, continuing follow-up of patients remains important."
When you read a "study" you need to dig a little deeper and read between the lines. Anyone can create a study to support their agenda. This study did not say that IPL produced a dangerous amount of lipid peroxides and did not clarify if any products were used on the skin. You should always look for something called P-value at the end of a clinical study - google it.
Are bodies are subject to free radicals and oxidative stress all day. Eating and breathing introduce free radicals. Oxygen can cause oxidative stress - I guess we should all stop breathing.
Most of these oxygen-derived species are produced at a low level by normal aerobic metabolism and the damage they cause to cells is constantly repaired.
Short-term oxidative stress may also be important in prevention of aging by induction of a process named mitohormesis. Reactive oxygen species can be beneficial, as they are used by the immune system as a way to attack and kill pathogens.
IPL has been around for 15 years now, plenty of time to compile some harder evidence I'd think.
The lack of said evidence against the broad use of IPL is pretty telling.
On the contrary, the strict instruction for IPL users to cover up and SPF30+ up if they want to maintain their results would be beneficial against skin cancer.
"Theoretically, the new, more powerful lasers and IPLs may cause delayed deleterious side-effects. In short, photons of
electromagnetic energy are a highly energetic form of energy.
Depending on the wavelength, laser energy will be transmitted
through skin layers and preferentially absorbed by a specific tissue chromophore, such as melanin, hemoglobin, nucleic
acids, amino acids, carotene, or urocanic acid in the skin.
From studies with ultraviolet light, melanoma appears to be related to intense, intermittent exposures. The wavelength dependence of the induction of melanoma and alterations in cancer parameters, such as the tumor suppressor gene CDKN2A
and oncogenes N-ras and H-ras , have not been studied in the light of these higher energy sources of electromagnetic energy.
In short, there are concerns about the long-term safety of lasers and IPLs, including the possible risk of melanoma. Little work has been performed to assess cancer development with these particular wavelengths, despite the fact that the manufacturers are continually adding extra power to their units.
It should be noted that any association of skin cancer with lasers is purely an assumption, as there have been no reports of problems in the literature. Nonetheless, physician monitoring
for such potential problems appears to be warranted."
It is neither pro nor anti IPL.