Clinical efficacy and safety of Nd-YAG laser in hair reduction

Keywords | Summary | Correspondence | References


, ,



Background: Laser has become popular means of achieving hair reduction with improved quality of life. Meanwhile, different types of lasers show different clinical efficacy and safety according to the characteristic wavelength for each device and skin types of persons. Laser devices incorporating higher wavelengths have been developed to improve hair removal on dark skin, such as 1064 nm Neodymium-doped Yttrium Aluminum Garnet (Nd: YAG) laser. They not only provide deeper light penetration for targeting deeply located follicles but also allow for higher fluences to be used since absorption by melanin decreases when wavelength is increased and therefore the skin is heated less. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of long-pulsed Nd: YAG laser on hair reduction. Methods: This study was carried out on 20 adult women who seek axillary hair reduction. These subjects were adjusted to receive 5 laser sessions with a 1- month interval. Clinical evaluation was done at 1 month after last session with detection of side effects of laser. Results: As regards Fitzpatrick skin type, 8 subjects (40%) were skin type III and 12 subjects (60%) were skin type IV. The hair count showed significant reduction (P<0.001) with hair reduction percentage of 64.3%. Regarding the side effects, there was significant pain during the procedure and encountered in 60% of cases. Conclusion: 1064-nm long pulsed Nd:YAG laser is safe and effective in hair reduction.


Leider haben Sie sich nicht eingeloggt, um den Beitrag lesen zu können. Bitte loggen Sie sich ein oder beantragen Sie Ihre Zugangsberechtigung. Vielen Dank. Weitere Informationen finden Sie hier>

Address of Correspondence

Wael Hosam Abdelrazek, MD
Dept. of Dermatology, STDs, and Andrology
Faculty of Medicine
Minia University
30, Adly Yakan Street
Minia, Egypt

Conflict of Interests

None declared.


1. Keegan A, Liao L-M and Boyle M. ‘Hirsutism’: a psychological analysis. J Health Psychol. 2003;8(3): 327-345.
2. Housman T, Derrow A, Snively B, Lahiry S, Rapp S, Hawes D, et al., Women with excessive facial hair: a statistical evaluation and review of impact on quality of life. Cosmetic Dermatology-Cedar Knolls-. 2004;17 (3): 157-165.
3. Blume‐Peytavi U, Vogt A. Current standards in the diagnostics and therapy of hair diseases–hair consultation. JDDG: J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2011;9(5): 394-412.
4. Blume Peytavi U. An overview of unwanted female hair. Br J Dermatol. 2011;165: 19-23.
5. Dias MFRG. Hair cosmetics: an overview. Int J Trichology. 2015; 7(1): 2.
6. Hills S, Seukeran D. Epilation Lasers. Practical Introduction to Laser Dermatology: Springer; 2020: 119-141.
7. Tulpule MS, Bhide DS, Bharatia P, Rathod NU. 810 nm diode laser for hair reduction with Chill-tip technology: prospective observational analysis of 55 patients of Fitzpatrick skin types III, IV, V. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2020; 22(2): 65-69.
8. Neithardt AB, Barnes RB. The diagnosis and management of hirsutism. Semin Reprod Med.2003; 21(3): 285- 294.
9. Thomas MM, Houreld NN. The “in’s and outs” of laser hair removal: a mini review. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2019; 21(6): 316-322.
10. Haedersdal M, Beerwerth F, Nash J. Laser and intense pulsed light hair removal technologies: from professional to home use. Br J Dermatol. 2011; 165: 31-36.
11. Bouzari N, Tabatabai H, Abbasi Z, Firooz A, Dowlati Y. Laser hair removal: comparison of long‐pulsed Nd: YAG, long pulsed alexandrite, and long‐pulsed diode lasers. Dermatol Surg. 2004;30(4): 498-502.
12. Gold MH, Biron J, Wilson A, Viera Mármol G, Lamas REV, Castillejos Pallàs M, et al. Safety and efficacy for hair removal in dark skin types III and IV with a high‐powered, combined wavelength (810, 940 and 1060 nm) diode laser: A single‐site pilot study. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2022 May; 21(5): 1979-1985.
13. Tanzi EL, Alster TS. Long‐pulsed 1064‐nm Nd: YAG laser‐assisted hair removal in all skin types. Dermatol Surg. 2004;30(1): 13-7.
14. Lim SP, Lanigan SW. A review of the adverse effects of laser hair removal. Lasers Med Sci. 2006 Sep;21(3): 121- 125.
15. Mármol GV, Villena J. New 3D in silico model of hair and skin heating during laser hair removal. Res J Pharm Med Sci. 2019; 3:15-24.
16. Wanitphakdeedecha R, Thanomkitti K, Sethabutra P, Eimpunth S, Manuskiatti W. A split axilla comparison study of axillary hair removal with low fluence high repetition rate 810 nm diode laser vs. high fluence low repetition rate 1064 nm Nd: YAG laser. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol.2012;26(9): 11336.
17. Alster TS, Bryan H, Williams CM. Long-pulsed Nd: YAG laser-assisted hair removal in pigmented skin: a clinical and histological evaluation. Arch Dermatol. 2001; 137(7): 885-889.
18. Lolis MS, Marmur ES. Paradoxical effects of hair removal systems: a review. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2006;5 (4):274-276.
19. Galadari I. Comparative evaluation of different hair removal lasers in skin types IV, V, and VI. Int J Dermatol. 2003;42(1):68-70.
20. Moftah N, Tymour M, Ibrahim SMA. Multipass low fluence, high-frequency 755-nm alexandrite laser versus high fluence, low-frequency 1064-nm long- pulsed Nd: YAG laser in axillary hair reduction of dark skin phototypes: an intra-individual randomized comparative study. J Dermatol Treat. 2022: 1-6.
21. Akinturk S, Eroglu A. Effect of piroxicam gel for pain control and inflammation in Nd: YAG 1064‐nm laser hair removal. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2007; 21(3): 380-383.