多脉冲强脉冲光脱毛的有效性及安全性
CSTR:
作者:
作者单位:

作者简介:

奎玲(1988.11-),女,云南玉溪人,博士,副研究员,主要从事皮肤医学研究与临床转化方面的工作

通讯作者:

叶巧园(1981.11-),女,湖北黄石人,硕士,副主任医师,主要从事皮肤医学方向研究工作

中图分类号:

R758.71

基金项目:


Efficacy and Safety of Multi-pulse Intense Pulsed Light for Hair Removal
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
  • |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    目的 比较多脉冲与单脉冲强脉冲光脱毛的有效性及安全性。方法 选取2025年3月-9月于东莞 市寮步医院进行脱毛治疗的90例患者为研究对象,采用随机数字表法分为A组(30例,脱落1例)、B组 (30例)、C组(30例,脱落1例)。A组使用强脉冲光治疗仪A治疗,脉冲模式为双脉冲/四脉冲;B组使用 强脉冲光治疗仪B治疗,脉冲模式为三脉冲/五脉冲;C组使用强脉冲光治疗仪B治疗,脉冲模式为单脉冲 模式,比较三组脱毛效果、疼痛程度、主观满意度及不良反应发生情况。结果 A组、B组治疗7周后脱毛 有效率、毛发密度、毛发减少率均优于C组(P <0.05),两组组间比较,差异无统计学意义(P >0.05); 三组NRS评分比较,差异无统计学意义(P >0.05);A组、B组主观满意度评分高于C组(P <0.05),两 组组间比较,差异无统计学意义(P >0.05);A组、B组、C组不良反应发生率分别为17.24%、16.67%、 13.79%,三组比较,差异无统计学意义(P >0.05)。结论 两款多脉冲强脉冲光设备的脱毛疗效相当,且 均优于单脉冲模式,同时未增加不良反应风险,具有良好的应用有效性与安全性。

    Abstract:

    Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of multi-pulse and single-pulse intense pulsed light for hair removal. Methods A total of 90 patients who underwent hair removal treatment in Dongguan Liaobu Hospital from March to September 2025 were selected as the research subjects. According to the random number table method, they were divided into three groups:Group A (30 patients, 1 patient lost to follow-up), Group B (30 patients), and Group C (30 patients, 1 patient lost to follow-up). Group A was treated with intense pulsed light device A operated in dual-pulse/four-pulse mode. Group B was treated with intense pulsed light device B operated in triple-pulse/five-pulse mode. Group C was treated with intense pulsed light device B operated in single-pulse mode. The hair removal efficacy, pain intensity, subjective satisfaction and adverse reactions were compared among the three groups. Results At 7 weeks after treatment, the effective rate of hair removal, hair density and hair reduction rate in Group A and Group B were higher than those in Group C (P <0.05), while there were no statistically significant differences between Group A and Group B (P >0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in NRS scores among the three groups (P >0.05).The subjective satisfaction score in Group A and Group B was higher than that in Group C (P <0.05), while there was no statistically significant difference between Group A and Group B (P >0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in Group A, Group B and Group C was 17.24%, 16.67% and 13.79% respectively, and there was no statistically significant difference among the three groups (P >0.05). Conclusion The two multi-pulse intense pulsed light devices have comparable hair removal efficacy, both of which are superior to the single-pulse mode. Meanwhile, they do not increase the risk of adverse reactions, showing good application efficacy and safety.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文

奎 玲,王国允,张 丽,等.多脉冲强脉冲光脱毛的有效性及安全性[J].医学美学美容,2025,34(24):110-113.

复制
分享
相关视频

文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:
  • 最后修改日期:
  • 录用日期:
  • 在线发布日期: 2026-01-22
  • 出版日期:
文章二维码