Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Spread of botulinum toxin outside the treated muscle is a concern, when energy-based device treatment is performed on the same day as toxin injection. OBJECTIVE:We assessed the frequency of eyelid ptosis after the glabella/periorbital botulinum toxin injection and nonablative fractionated laser performed at the same session. METHODS AND MATERIALS/METHODS:This single-center, retrospective study identified treatments consisting of glabella and/or periorbital botulinum toxin injection and nonablative fractionated laser treatment to full face from 2017 to 2019 and eyelid ptosis determined by documentation of the complication at a follow-up encounter, or prescription of apraclonidine. RESULTS:Six hundred sixteen treatments of glabella/periorbital botulinum toxin injection and full-face nonablative fractionated laser on the same day on 393 individuals were identified. Five hundred eighty treatments (94%) included botulinum toxin injected in the glabella, 541 (88%) in the periorbital areas, and 508 (82%) in the forehead. Nonablative fractionated lasers used to treat the cohort were a 1,927-nm thulium and a 1,550-nm er:glass laser. Eyelid ptosis complication was documented in one case (0.2%) following the combined laser and toxin treatment. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The risk of spread of glabella/periorbital botulinum toxin to an unintended muscle was minimal in the setting of the concomitant full-face nonablative fractionated laser.

This case series demonstrates an exaggerated form of the clinical presentation of a known distressing late complication of retained hyaluronic acid filler – the “pale puffy pillow.” This presentation is often, unfortunately for the patient, misdiagnosed as festoons. However, the correction with liberal hyaluronidase is simple. Additionally, we have demonstrated that ablative fractional carbon dioxide laser resurfacing is an excellent tool that may be utilized after hyaluronidase to correct the residual skin laxity.J Drugs Dermatol. 20(4):475-476. doi:10.36849/JDD.5509.

<p>BACKGROUND: The number of nonsurgical aesthetic procedures performed in men is growing rapidly. However, there are limited data on treatment principles and goals for the male aesthetic patient.</p> <p>OBJECTIVE: To review the objective data available on male aging and aesthetics and to synthesize with expert opinion on treatment considerations specific to male patients.</p> <p>METHODS: Expert advisors met to discuss anatomical differences in male versus female facial anatomy related to aging, facial treatment preferences in aesthetically oriented men, and current dosing data for facial injectable treatments in male versus female patients.</p> <p>RESULTS: Symmetry, averageness, sexual dimorphism, and youthfulness are generally accepted as factors that contribute to the perception of attractiveness. There are differences between men and women in facial anatomy, concepts of attractiveness in the context of masculinity and femininity, and treatment objectives. A communication gap exists for men, as evidenced by the lack of information available online or by word of mouth about injectable treatments.</p> <p>CONCLUSIONS: Approaches to aesthetic consultation and treatment should differ between men and women based on the fundamental dissimilarities between the sexes. Educating men about available aesthetic treatments and about the safety and side effects associated with each treatment, as well as addressing concerns about their treatment results looking natural, are key considerations.</p> <p><em>J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(1):19-28.</em></p>.

BACKGROUND:Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is an FDA approved treatment for actinic keratoses (AK's) although multiple off-label indi- cations are reported. Despite frequent use for AK's, no clear consensus exists regarding protocols for overall treatment parameters. METHODS:Retrospective chart review of 1,491 subjects who underwent PDT between 2007 and 2011 at a high volume laser surgery center. Demographic information, clinical history, treatment data, and subsequent diagnosis of skin cancers were recorded. An ex- ploratory subgroup analysis was performed for patients treated for AK and/or squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) that developed SCC or remained SCC-free one year after treatment. RESULTS:The most common indications for PDT were actinic keratoses (n=1404, 94.9%) then NMSC (n=45, 3.0%) The most common treatment site was the head and neck (n=1274, 86.1%). Blue light activation (405-420nm) was used more frequently than red light and visible light. (73.8% vs. 22.8% vs. 6.8%). The most commonly used photosensitizer was aminolevulinic acid (ALA) (98.6%, n=1456). Topical application (97.7% n=1437) of photosensitizer was used more frequently than intralesional administration (2.0%, n=29). 580 patients met subgroup analysis criteria. 66 developed SCC at treatment site (11%). Factors associated with developing SCC were older age, SCC history, Fitzpatrick skin-type 1, and sixty-minute or less incubation times (P less than 0.05 for all factors). The SCC subgroup had a unique distribution of treatment sites (P less than.001). No statistically significant differences were observed for gender or wavelength. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:There are differences in protocols based on indication and location of lesion. Blue light is preferable for superFIcial lesions and red light for deeper lesions. Intralesional delivery is used more commonly for NMSC. Extremities require longer incubation times. PDT may be more effective with younger patients and longer than sixty-minute incubation times. PDT chemoprevention is independent of light source used. <em>J Drugs Dermatol. 2016;15(11):1420-1426.</em>.

Importance: Fractional laser technology is routinely used in the treatment of acne scarring, with thermal injury resulting in collagen synthesis and remodeling. Use of a picosecond pulse duration with a diffractive lens array may be a new technologic advancement in the treatment of acne scarring. Objective: To investigate the safety and efficacy of a 755-nm alexandrite picosecond pulse duration laser with diffractive lens array for the treatment of facial acne scarring. Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-center, prospective study performed in a private practice with a dedicated research department included patients with clinically diagnosed scarring secondary to inflammatory or cystic acne. Interventions: Patients received 6 treatments with a 755-nm picosecond laser with a spot size of 6 mm, fluence of 0.71 J/cm2, repetition rate of 5 Hz, and pulse width of 750 picoseconds in combination with a diffractive lens array, allowing for greater surface area and pattern density per pulse. Main Outcomes and Measures: The pain and satisfaction scores for overall appearance and texture were recorded. Masked assessment of clinical photographs and analysis of 3-dimensional volumetric data were performed. Biopsy specimens were obtained for independent histologic evaluation by 2 investigators at baseline and at 3 months after last treatment. Results: Fifteen women and 5 men (mean age, 44 years; age range, 27-61 years) with Fitzpatrick skin types I through V and facial acne scarring were enrolled. The mean pain score was 2.83 of 10. Patients were satisfied to extremely satisfied with improvement in appearance and texture at their final treatment and follow-up visits. The masked assessment scores of 17 patients were 1.5 of 3 and 1.4 of 3 at 1 and 3 months, respectively (a score of 0 indicates 0%-25% improvement and a score of 3 indicates >75% improvement). A 3-dimensional analysis revealed a mean 24.3% improvement in scar volume, maintained at 1 (24.0%) and 3 (27.2%) months after treatment. Histologic analysis revealed elongation and increased density of elastic fibers, with an increase in dermal collagen and mucin. Conclusions and Relevance: Treatment of facial acne scars with a diffractive lens array and 755-nm picosecond laser produced improvement in appearance and texture at 3 months after the last treatment, with objective findings similar to those published for a series of fractional ablative laser treatments. Histologic findings suggest that improvement in scarring from this treatment goes beyond remodeling of collagen.