The alternative ear-piercing technique by using superpulsed carbon dioxide laser: a comparative study with spring-loaded gun.

Ear piercing (EP) is increasing in popularity among teenagers. Techniques for EP should be selected carefully to prevent possible complications. The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of EP techniques between CO(2) laser and spring-loaded gun. This is a prospective and comparative clinical trial. Under local anesthesia, EP was performed on left ear with CO(2) laser (20 watt/single mode) and on right ear with spring-loaded gun. With visual analog scale (VAS, 0-10) and questionnaire, post-operative pain and wound healing status were assessed immediately, 1, 2, 4 and 8 weeks after EP procedure. Fourteen subjects (14/17, 82.4%) completed the whole study. Immediately after the procedure, the level of post-operative pain (VAS) was 3.2 for CO(2) laser and 1.5 for spring-loaded gun (p < 0.05). In CO(2) laser group, pain severity decreased to 0.4, 0.1, 0, and 0, while in spring-loaded gun group, the decrease was only to 0.7, 0.6, 0.3 and 0 at 1, 2, 4, and 8 weeks, respectively. Duration of post-operative pain was 3.8 and 17.5 days for CO(2) laser and spring-loaded gun, respectively (p < 0.05). There was no major complication like infection, bleeding or hypertrophic scar. Our study suggests that CO(2) laser is a precise, simple, safe and aseptic technique for EP. It has a lower level and shorter duration of post-operative pain, when compared with spring-loaded gun. Therefore, CO(2) assisted EP is an alternative and feasible technique in our daily clinical practice. The level of evidence: 2b.