Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory condition characterized by painful nodules, draining tunnels, and fibrotic scarring in intertriginous, hair-bearing areas. The pathogenesis involves follicular occlusion and subsequent rupture, leading to uncontrolled inflammation. Treatment options for HS are limited and lack universal effectiveness. Laser hair removal (LHR) has been explored as a potential treatment; however, the efficacy and appropriate laser modalities remain unclear. This systematic review examined the efficacy and adverse effects of LHR in HS.
A comprehensive literature search was conducted from inception to September 2023 in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and The Cochrane Library (Wiley) with predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, and a meta-analysis was conducted.
Ten studies were selected (n = 227 total patients) and included six randomized controlled trials, two nonrandomized experimental studies, and two case series. Various laser modalities, including long-pulsed neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG) (n = 115), intense pulsed light (n = 18), Alexandrite (n = 54), intralesional 1064 nm diode (n = 20), and combined fractional CO2 and long-pulsed Nd:YAG laser (n = 20), consistently demonstrated significant improvement in HS disease severity, irrespective of the disease scoring method used. Minimal adverse effects (primarily mild pain and erythema) were reported. A meta-analysis of three studies utilizing long-pulsed Nd:YAG laser demonstrated a standardized mean difference in disease severity of -1.68 (95% confidence interval: -2.99; -0.37), favoring treatment with LHR for HS.
Hair follicles are key in HS pathogenesis and all included studies showed a significant improvement in HS disease severity after LHR regardless of the laser device used, likely related to hair follicle unit destruction. HS is a complex and heterogenous condition, and multiple disease scoring methods complicate outcome comparisons across studies. However, LHR, utilizing various techniques, is an effective treatment option for HS with minimal adverse effects.

OBJECTIVE: Intraoral hair growth is a debilitating side effect of flap or graft-based oropharyngeal reconstruction. There is no standardized treatment, but groups have successfully eradicated unwanted hair growth with intraoral laser hair removal. This scoping review assesses the utility of laser therapy in managing this condition.
METHODS: This scoping review followed PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Ovid Medline, Embase (Ovid) and Scopus were queried using index terms and keywords. Resulting articles were reviewed for inclusion by two independent reviewers against inclusion criteria and relevant data were extracted.
RESULTS: The literature search yielded 297 articles, 22 of which met inclusion criteria. In total, 77 patients were treated: 38 patients with an Alexandrite laser, 19 with an Nd:YAG laser, 18 with a diode laser, and two with a CO2 laser. Complete response defined as 80% or more reduction in hair count was achieved in 70 patients (90%) and six patients (8%) achieved a partial response (10%-79% reduction in hair count). One patient (1%) with gray hair saw less than a 10% reduction in hair count. On average, 3.84 treatment sessions were needed, spaced 5.4 weeks apart. Treatments were well tolerated without major side effects.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first scoping review assessing the utility of intraoral laser hair therapy and suggests it may be a safe and effective treatment. However, surgeons should advise preoperative hair removal when clinically feasible to mitigate this side effect as much as possible.

UNASSIGNED: Hirsutism represents a significant concern for women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), with deleterious psychological effects warranting acknowledgment and a clear imperative to provide effective management. To our knowledge, this is the first review to exclusively examine the effectiveness of laser and light-based therapies in addressing hirsutism in women with PCOS.
UNASSIGNED: To synthesize the existing literature regarding the effectiveness of laser and light hair reduction therapies, either as stand-alone treatments or in combination with systemic agents, in treating hirsutism for women with PCOS.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic literature review was performed using MEDLINE, Embase, EMCARE, and CINAHL according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Articles written in English, reporting on patients who met pre-established inclusion criteria were selected. Objective and subjectively measured outcomes relating to the effect of laser or light-based hair reduction therapies on hirsutism were abstracted. Heterogeneity among included studies precluded a meta-analysis, necessitating a narrative synthesis.
UNASSIGNED: Six studies reporting data on 423 individual patients with PCOS who underwent laser or light-based hair reduction therapies were included: 4 randomized clinical trials and 2 cohort studies. Alexandrite laser demonstrated significant improvements in hirsutism severity and psychological outcomes, particularly at high-fluence application. Alexandrite laser was also found to be more effective than intense pulsed light (IPL). The combination of diode laser with either metformin or combined oral contraceptive pill was superior to the application of diode laser alone, just as the addition of metformin to IPL demonstrated superior results to IPL treatment alone. Overall, most interventions were well tolerated. The overall certainty of evidence across all outcomes and comparisons was limited in part due to the observational nature of some studies.
UNASSIGNED: This systematic review highlights the potential of laser and light hair reduction therapies, both as stand-alone treatments and in combination with other pharmacological agents in PCOS. However, this review was limited by low certainty of the evidence, few studies evaluating effectiveness and safety in those with skin of color, and heterogeneity in outcome assessment. Future studies are needed to provide more robust evidence among diverse individuals with PCOS and hirsutism.

BACKGROUND: Pubic hair grooming involves the partial or complete removal of pubic hair, and it is a common practice among men and women. Grooming is more prevalent in women, who employ various methods such as shaving, waxing and laser removal. However, it is associated with variable rates of post-grooming adverse outcomes including lacerations and sexually transmitted infections (STIs). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic review and meta-analysis comparing women\'s sexual health outcomes between those who groom and those who don\'t.
METHODS: We followed the MOOSE guidelines and conducted a computerized-based search using (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Ovid Medline), till June 20th, 2022, for eligible studies using the relevant keywords; (pubic hair grooming) OR (pubic hair removal OR Genital hairless OR Bikini hair removal OR pubic hair depilation). Cross-sectional studies included which compared grooming practices among women in terms of motivation and health outcomes. Women\'s satisfaction and incidence of STIs were pooled as standardized mean difference (SMD) and odds ratio (OR) respectively.
RESULTS: Twenty-Two cross-sectional studies were included in our review with 73,091 participant.The odds of having gram-negative gonorrheal and chlamydial infection in Pubic hair groomers were found to be statistically significant (OR = 1.55, 95% CI [1.31, 1.84], P < 0.001) (OR = 1.56, 95% CI [1.32, 1.85], P < 0.001] respectively. There was no difference between groomer and non-groomer women regarding viral infections such as genital herpes (OR = 1.40, 95% CI [0.56, 3.50], P = 0.47) and Condyloma acuminata (OR = 1.75, 95% CI [0.51, 6.01], P = 0.37). The most common grooming side effect is genital itching (prevalence = 26.9%, P < 0.001). Non-electrical razor (prevalence = 69.3%, P < 0.001) is the most common grooming method. White women (prevalence = 80.2%, P < 0.001) remove pubic hair more frequently compared to black women (prevalence = 12.2%, P < 0.001). Women practice complete grooming (50.3%, P < 0.001) of the pubic hair more frequently than partial grooming (33.1%, P < 0.001). There are no differences in women\'s satisfaction between the two groups (SMD = 0.12, 95% CI [-0.16, 0.40], P = 0.39).
CONCLUSIONS: This review aligns with previous observational studies regarding sexual health outcomes of pubic hair grooming. There is a need to raise awareness among women regarding the safe practice of pubic hair grooming, emphasizing the clarification of hazards and benefits.

UNASSIGNED: Fox-Fordyce disease is a recognized adverse effect of depilating lasers. It should be considered among the differential diagnoses of the pruritic perifollicular papules that occur at the hair removal laser treatment site, including Alex/Diode laser.
UNASSIGNED: Fox-Fordyce disease (FFD) is an uncommon skin disorder affecting the apocrine sweat glands and presents as pruritic skin-colored papules, mainly on the axillary and pubic areas. Some predisposing factors are proposed, including hormonal changes. A few cases of FFD have been reported after hair removal by light- and laser-assisted devices. Herein, we report FFD in some areas (axillary and pubic areas) treated with Alex/Diode hair removal laser.

Unwanted hair is a common concern among patients presenting to pediatric dermatology clinics, and parents and patients alike inquire about the safety of methods employed for elective removal. Various methods of hair removal exist with different levels of invasiveness and permanence, from simple mechanical depilation to light-based therapies. All methods of hair removal appear to be safe and generally well tolerated in children, and there are no age restrictions to any modality. In this review, we aim to address the available literature on the safety and efficacy of hair removal modalities in pediatric patients and propose guidance on how to manage requests for at-home and in-office therapies within an ethical framework.

Light-based hair removal home devices emit intense pulse light (IPL) or Diode laser. While the Food and Drug Administration controls them in the US, Europe continues to classify them as cosmetic products. Emerging concerns are: what if an unprotected eye is inadvertently exposed to light emission? Or if the consumer tries to overcome the protective safety features? We performed this systematic review by searching the Medline, CENTRAL, and Google Scholar databases to investigate the ocular damage reported after exposure to IPL for hair removal. We could not identify any case reported following exposure to home devices; however, a total of 20 patients were identified with iris atrophy, anterior chamber inflammation, and/or retinal pigment epithelium damage following exposure to office IPL or Diode lights. 40% were not using any protective eyewear during the light procedure. The reported fluences were in the range of 20-24 J/cm2. Although the ocular damage was identified following office devices, the reported fluences were within the home device\'s limits. For that, manufacturers should provide clear instructions on the package regarding the ocular hazards, the importance of using protective goggles, and a firm warning not to overcome the contact sensors. Home device-induced ocular damage is still a concern, perhaps under-reported.

The long-pulse alexandrite laser uses Cr3+:BeAl2O4 crystals as the activation medium and has a 755nm wavelength and millisecond pulse duration. The long-pulse alexandrite laser has been utilized for hair removal, vascular lesions, pigmented lesions, and other conditions because melanin and hemoglobin in the skin, subcutaneous tissues, and skin appendages can specifically absorb this type of laser. To serve as a guide and source of inspiration for the clinical use of this type of laser, we review the present research status and advancement of the long-pulse alexandrite laser in the treatment of the aforementioned categories of disorders.

Importance: Laser hair removal is a noninvasive technique that has been used for patients with oropharyngolaryngeal hair growth related to surgical flap reconstruction after head and neck cancer resection. The purpose of this work was to perform a rapid review of the literature to determine the therapeutic relevance of laser hair removal and identify laser parameters. Observations: A total of 10 publications addressing depilation of the head and neck sphere were selected and analyzed. Conclusions and Relevance: Laser therapy appears to be a promising treatment for hair removal from flaps with few side effects. However, there is no scientific basis for a standardized protocol or determination of the superiority of laser hair removal over another treatment.

Atypical clinical and dermoscopic findings, or changes in pigmented melanocytic lesions located on body areas treated with lasers or intense pulsed light (IPL) for hair removal (photoepilation), have been described in the literature. There are three prospective studies in a total of 79 individuals with 287 melanocytic nevi and several case reports reporting the dermoscopic findings and changes after photoepilation. Clinical changes have been reported in 20-100% of individuals, while dermoscopic changes have been observed in 48% to 93% of nevi. More frequent dermoscopic changes included bleaching, the development of pigmented globules, and irregular hyperpigmented areas and regression structures, including gray areas, gray dots/globules, and whitish structureless areas. The diagnostic approach for pigmented lesions with atypical dermoscopic findings and changes after photo-epilation included reflectance confocal microscopy, sequential digital dermoscopy follow-up, and/or excision and histopathology. Challenges pertaining to these diagnostic steps in the context of photoepilation include the detection of findings that may warrant a biopsy to exclude melanoma (ugly duckling, irregular hyperpigmented areas, blue-gray or white areas, and loss of pigment network), the potential persistence of changes at follow-up, and that a histopathologic diagnosis may not be possible due to the distortion of melanocytes or complete regression of the lesion. Furthermore, these diagnostic approaches can be time-consuming, require familiarization of the physician with dermoscopic features, may cause anxiety to the individual, and highlight that avoiding passes of the laser or IPL devices over pigmented lesions is key.