Ellipse Rejuvenation: The clinical proof

 

 

Ellipse Rejuvenation treatments  (Skin Rejuvenation or Photorejuvenation depending on the applicator used)  are treatments to improve sun damaged skin – which either presents as redness (leading eventually to formation of larger blood vessels) or as areas of dyspigmentation, and eventually age spots (also called liver spots and medically called solar lentigines). In the US, the term rejuvenation is not allowed (there it is officially referred to as redness and pigmentation). But system operators and patients as always deserve to know that the treatments they offer  or receive work. The list below shows some of the clinical proof provided by Ellipse.

Facial photo rejuvenation using two different Intense Pulsed Light (IPL) wavelength bands. Peter Bjerring, MD et al. (Lasers in Surgery and Medicine 34: 120 – 126, 2004)

The first study, and an important one that should widespread success, but also showed that in European skin, on applicator used , the VL-2 (now remodelled as the VL+) produced better results on pigment, while the PR (now PR+) achieved better results on redness. The study also reported that despite using less energy, success with Ellipse required fewer treatments than  than with other Intense Pulsed Light devices..

Before and After Two Treatments

Photorejuvenation by Intense Pulsed Light with objective measurement of skin colour in Japanese patients. Kei Negishi, MD et al. (Dermatol Surg 2006; 32: 1380 – 1387)

A fascinating study that shows not only high patient satisfaction, but highlighted a condition called hidden melasma, rare in Europe but more common in Asia, that had the potential to be impacted by treatment. Even more interesting, the study showed some ability to lighten the skin of the patient

Skin rejuvenation using intense pulsed light. A randomized controlled split-face trial with blinded response evaluation. Lene Hedelund, MD et. al. (Arch Dermatol/Vol 142, Aug. 2006, 985 – 990)

An important study showing that Ellipse treatments not only had a positive result on redness and pigment but also on skin texture

Safety and efficacy of a second-generation intense pulsed source for treating Asian skin. Harue Suzuki et al.

Another study showing good results, but also finding that vascular treatments on Asian skin were better using the VL-2/VL+ applicator, because of the slightly thicker epidermis

Ellipse Hair Removal: the clinical proof

Hair Removal is the basis for many clients seeking Intense Pulsed Light treatment. For the clinic owning the equipment, it is equally important to know that the system used removes hair, and that it stays away.

Hair removal with second generation broad spectrum intense pulsed light source – a long-term follow-up. Agneta Troilius et. al (Journal of cutaneous laser therapy 1999; 1: 173-178)

The first published study by Ellipse investigated the bikini line hair of 10 Swedish patients. A hair count was made before, 4 months (1 hair cycle) after and 8 months (2 hair cycles after) 4 treatments (1 month between treatments).

Before and 8 months after 4 treatments

The study showed hair reduction of 75% at 4 months and 80% at 8 months

Hair reduction using a new intense pulsed light irradiator and a normal mode ruby laser. Peter Bjerring et al. (Journal of cutaneous laser therapy 2000; 2: 63-71)

In 2000, use of ruby laser for hair removal was the norm, and this study found that 93.5% of patients treated with Ellipse I2PL achieved measurable hair loss, compared to only 55% with the ruby laser.  Figures for both systems were lower than  would now be expected, as treatment parameters and intervals have evolved in the subsequent 13 years.

Comparison of different methods of photo epilation. S. Strangl et al. ( Med. Laser Appl. 17: 349 (2002))

An interesting German study that compared Ellipse 2^nd generation Intense Pulsed Light with a first generation system (ie the effect of dual mode filtering) and with Diode and Alexandrite lasers. Various body sites were treated with each system. “The best results were obtained with the second generation  IPL system Ellipse”

Photoepilation results of axillary hair in dark-skinned patients by intense pulsed light: comparison between different wavelengths and pulse widths. Jong Hee Lee et. al. (Dermatol Surg 2006; 32: 239-245) 

A Korean study comparing the HR and HR-D applicators  when treating axilla. The HR-D gave an average clearance of 83%, with no side effects.

Hair removal with Ellipse Flex intense pulsed light system. Zeng et. al. (Chinese Journal of Aesthetic Medicine. Nov. 2006. Vol.15. No.11)

A huge study of 365 patients, that showed the HR applicator to remove and average of 96% of hair after 3-7 treatments.

Hair removal of hirsutism caused by endocrinological disease or drug induced – a retrospective study of 253 patients. Lo Rumar et al. (EADV 2008)

An interesting Swedish study that looked at hair removal in various groups of “problem” patients, transsexuals, those with hormone problems (including Polycystic Ovary Syndrome – PCOS – and those whose hirsutism was caused by medication. The number of treatments required to get results is naturally higher, but the study concluded that (Ellipse) IPL was equally as effective in patients with hormonal problems as those without.

Intense pulsed light photoepilation turns out to be permanent at 5-9 years follow-up. Peter Bjerring, MD et al. (White paper, 2011)

Hair reduction with intense pulsed light – is it permanent? – a 5-10 years follow-up investigation gives the answer. Peter Bjerring, MD et al. (22nd World Congress of Dermatology, Seoul, Korea, 24-29 May, 2011)

Two papers on a very long term follow-up study (5-9 years after treatment) ended, that found only very modest regrowth after this time, and concluded that treatment could be considered as permanent hair removal.

The image shows a clearance of 63%, 9 years after the end of treatments.

Ellipse: clinically proven , safe and effective

Clinically proven, safe and effective

Ellipse has used the slogan ”Clinically proven , safe and effective” for many years, but what does it really mean?

Welcome to a short series of blog entries that will be issued over the next few weeks, leading up to the launch of a brand new Ellipse treatment. To find out more, and be amongst the first in the world to learn about the new treatment, remember to follow this blog.

The series of blogs will cover

1. The Ellipse commitment to research √
2. Hair Removal: the clinical proof √
3. Rejuvenation: the clinical proof √
4. Vascular treatments: the clinical proof √
5. Acne and wrinkles: the clinical proof √

The Ellipse commitment to research

Ellipse has had an ongoing commitment to research since it was started 16 years ago. Rather than produce a “black box” and try to find what it could be used for, Ellipse has worked with leading dermatologists to build a system “from the skin up”. In other words, we have identified a problem, and then worked with specialist doctors to design a system, an applicator and a treatment protocol to solve this problem. Both users and clients need to be certain that safe and effective means just that. The certainty comes from the clinical proof.

So before each new treatment is made available, it is first tested in a clinical trial. This is a test carried out on a group of volunteers, under very strict conditions that are independently approved, where the improvements  are evaluated both by the patients themselves, and by physicians; where any side effects or feeling of discomfort are noted; and where the final results are measured and statistics produced. Follow-up examinations of the patients are held to make sure that the results are real and long-lasting. When all of this has been done, the clinical trial is submitted to a journal (a trade magazine for dermatologists), where it is independently reviewed – and only published if the reviewers agree with the conclusion.

By following the clinical trial route, we can be sure that your treatment should always produce known “clinically proven” results.  This means that the patient or client is always a patient or client, and never a lab rat.