BACKGROUND: For many years, the treatment of facial wrinkles has been performed exclusively by dermabrasion, chemical peeling, or surgical face lifting. However, the recently introduced carbon dioxide lasers which emit ultrashort coherent light beams enable the cosmetic surgeon to ablate superficial epidemic layers with absent or very limited side effects. The purpose of this paper is to compare laser skin resurfacing with classical face lifting and discuss the potentials and limitations of each method. METHODS AND PATIENTS: Three patients suffering from facial wrinkles on photoaged skin were treated with the ultrapulsed CO2 laser (UltraPulse 5000 C; wavelength 10,600 nm, pulse duration 0.6 to 0.9 ms, maximum pulse energy 500 mJ). This laser guarantees vaporization of very thin superficial skin layers without scarring and with minimizing lateral thermal injury due to extreme short pulse duration. A special handpiece (CPG) permits an exact approach and a bloodless ablation of relatively large areas of facial skin. The fourth patient underwent a surgical face lift due to the depth of wrinkles. RESULTS: Excellent cosmetic results were achieved in all three patients with superficial wrinkles who were treated by laser skin resurfacing. When treating deeper wrinkles, e.g., glabella or nasolabial fold, the surgical face lift is the preferred method. CONCLUSION: Ultrapulsed CO2 laser treatment expands the therapeutic options for superficial facial wrinkles, especially for perioral, periorbital, forehead, and cheeks wrinkles. It proves to be a safe and effective method with very limited if any side effects. Nevertheless, deeper wrinkles are still a domain of the classical face lift. The combination of both methods may improve the overall outcome in the future.
BACKGROUND: For many years, the treatment of facial wrinkles has been performed exclusively by dermabrasion, chemical peeling, or surgical face lifting. However, the recently introduced carbon dioxide lasers which emit ultrashort coherent light beams enable the cosmetic surgeon to ablate superficial epidemic layers with absent or very limited side effects. The purpose of this paper is to compare laser skin resurfacing with classical face lifting and discuss the potentials and limitations of each method. METHODS AND PATIENTS: Three patients suffering from facial wrinkles on photoaged skin were treated with the ultrapulsed CO2 laser (UltraPulse 5000 C; wavelength 10,600 nm, pulse duration 0.6 to 0.9 ms, maximum pulse energy 500 mJ). This laser guarantees vaporization of very thin superficial skin layers without scarring and with minimizing lateral thermal injury due to extreme short pulse duration. A special handpiece (CPG) permits an exact approach and a bloodless ablation of relatively large areas of facial skin. The fourth patient underwent a surgical face lift due to the depth of wrinkles. RESULTS: Excellent cosmetic results were achieved in all three patients with superficial wrinkles who were treated by laser skin resurfacing. When treating deeper wrinkles, e.g., glabella or nasolabial fold, the surgical face lift is the preferred method. CONCLUSION: Ultrapulsed CO2 laser treatment expands the therapeutic options for superficial facial wrinkles, especially for perioral, periorbital, forehead, and cheeks wrinkles. It proves to be a safe and effective method with very limited if any side effects. Nevertheless, deeper wrinkles are still a domain of the classical face lift. The combination of both methods may improve the overall outcome in the future.