LUCE laser

[thinkingaboutit]

Has anyone had experience with the LUCE laser?

 

Yesterday I met a woman who works as an assistant to some MHR doctors.She told me that the doctors that she works for utilize this light theray after a HT to reduce shock-loss and stimulate growth.

 

After monitoring this site I am suspicious of anything that comes out of the mouth of an MHR associate, but, the theory of using a laser light sounds interesting and if there is any merit to it I wonder why most docs don't employ its use.

[thinkingaboutit]

Has anyone had experience with the LUCE laser?

 

Yesterday I met a woman who works as an assistant to some MHR doctors.She told me that the doctors that she works for utilize this light theray after a HT to reduce shock-loss and stimulate growth.

 

After monitoring this site I am suspicious of anything that comes out of the mouth of an MHR associate, but, the theory of using a laser light sounds interesting and if there is any merit to it I wonder why most docs don't employ its use.

[MrJobi]

Hi

 

I would say it's just "fluff" like the doc's who use Oxygen

[Mahair]

Ask her why they don't stop using mini-grafts to reduce shockloss.Anyone who associates or has anything to do with MHR could work in a concentration camp and sleep easy. Find better freinds .

[hairworthy]

Anyone who associates or has anything to do with MHR could work in a concentration camp and sleep easy.

Mahair you are the sunshine of this forum.

 

Seriously, forget about laser, this is the same crap that Advanced Hair Studio sells. They claim that laser treatment stimulates growth, "opens the pores" and so on. There is no scientific proof of that. There is, however, proof that it will cost you to find out.

[DrBauman]

Originally posted by Mrjb:

Hi

 

I would say it's just "fluff" like the doc's who use Oxygen

 

Actually, the wound-healing benefits of phototherapy and hyperbaric oxygen are well documented in the scientific literature. However, they do not replace good technique (minimal-depth incisions, low-tension donor closures, etc.) but, in my experience, they can certainly accelerate healing and have other benefits.

 

I first became aware of hyperbaric oxygen therapy in my training at New York Medical College (where there was a large burn-unit on campus) and in my General Surgery training at Mt. Sinai and Beth Israel Medical Centers in Manhattan. Years ago, as a student, then an intern and resident, I was exposed to the use of Oxygen as treatment for non-healing wounds, burn victims, stroke victims and autistic children.

 

It is interesting to note that the use of hyperbaric oxygen immediately after a follicular-unit hair transplantation procedure also SIGNIFICANTLY reduces discomfort--even the muscle soreness from just sitting in the chair for hours improves dramatically.

 

Here's an example of the skin changes seen:

This patient received a one hour treatment of 02 at about 2 atmospheres of pressure in a large hyperbaric chamber then returned to my office for photos.

 

The immediate skin changes in patients who recieve hyperbaric oxygen are quite obvious on a consistent basis. In my practice, one to three HBOT (hyperbaric oxygen therapy) treatments are pretty much routine for years now, smokers and diabetics do up to ten treatments. Keep in mind that not all surgeons have access to this kind of facility. I'm lucky to have a private, high-quality facility about a mile away from my office. The treatments there cost about 1/10th of what they charge in the local hospital, about $200/hr. HBOT is quite safe and comfortable (relaxing, even)--as long as you know how to 'pop' your ears (like when you ride on an airplane).

 

Quite a number of interesting studies appear in the medical literature regarding HBOT, wound healing, grafting, etc. Here is a small sampling:

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed...&itool=pubmed_docsum

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?itool=abs...s&list_uids=16604253

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?itool=abs...us&list_uids=1389055

 

Hyperbaric Oxygen is becoming increasingly more popular with cosmetic surgery procedures. Here's a link to some info on a plastic surgery website... http://yestheyrefake.net/HBOT_faq.htm

 

Sincerely,

Dr. B.

[Tom R.]

I don't want to be attacked here by anyone for sharing information. I thought I'd put that out there before I type anything else. I have used low level laser therapy in the past with some success. I did not regrow hair but it did enhance the quality of hair I have.

 

For those of you who don't know anything about me, I've had HT's done by the Shapiro Medical Group as recently as October '06. Just prior to the recent surgery, I contacted Matt Zupan or was it Jenny to inquire about the use of lasers prior to the surgery. To my amazement, they acknowledged it has "some" benefit. So much so that they have a unit, purchased by Dr Shapiro, for patient use after a HT peformed at the SMG. That's all I have to say about my experience with the LLHT.

[Bill - Seemiller]

Dr Bauman,

 

Thanks for sharing your expertise on the subject. From the pictures and your information, it does appear that the HBOT therapy can have some positive healing effects.

 

I think it's important, however, for everyone to beware of outfits selling laser therapy as a way to regrow hair. Though there is some science behind it's benefit, there is no evidence that points to the fact that it regrows any hair, at least, not in my research. I admit, however, that my research in this area is limited and am no expert on laser therapy or HBOT.

 

Bill

[NervousNelly]

We have had a similar thread in the past regarding this issue. I myself believe that there is some merit in laser therapy and HBOT but lets face it, niether are going to perform miracles.

 

I think that if you have more money than you know what to do with why not try it as it has shown some evidence of success.

[DrBauman]

Good point. I do believe LLLT (low level laser therapy) has some benefit--I've seen some interesting responses from using phototherapy in my practice since 1999. However, the benefits should not be 'over-sold.' It would be like Pfizer promising a full head of hair using Rogaine... Minox is effective, but obviously has its limitations. The same holds true with light therapy. My opinion is that there is some kind of enhancing effect on the follicles that are still alive. Not every patient gets a result. Those with more hair do better--women especially. Bald skin, forget it. Miniaturized hair--some effect.

We all know you have to stick to the fda-approved, 'tried and true' treatments first (propecia + minoxidil). But, if there's a non-chemical, non-invasive treatment that has no side effects with a chance of some moderate aesthetic benefit, why not?

 

Some of the problem lies in the fact that it can be difficult for 'the user' to judge the results of his or her own progress. Personally, I track the progress of my patients with photos, digital and microscopic. Good photos are critical in the treatment of hair loss, as well as a physician-evaluation. (Starting a treatment without standardized photos would be like trying to judge the results of a weight loss program without stepping on the scale?)

If treatments (whatever they may be), after an appropriate amount of time and compliance, are not reaching the patient's goals, we re-evaluate the situation and make changes.

 

Sincerely,

Dr. B.

 

P.S. As an aside, it is appropriate to be somewhat wary of a hair loss evalutations performed and treatments recommended without a physician involved.