Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
EVALUATION OF INTENSE PULSED LIGHT DEVICES USING STANDARDIZED M ETHODOLOGY. G. Town 1 , C. Ash 2
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
G. Town1, C. Ash2
1RPA2000 Laser Protection Adviser, Haywards Heath, United Kingdom2OptoElectronic Engineer, Swansea, Wales, United KingdomThe following potential conflict of interest relationships are germane to my presentation:Financial grant, equipment, consulting feesand travel expenses paid by CyDen Ltd.
Status of off-label use of devices, drugs or other materials that constitute the subject of this presentation:
Data was gathered on-site between patient appointments over a 6-month period in clinics where devices were in daily use.
Manufacturers’ information was collected from user manuals, company web sites and literature.Introduction
Shorter wavelengths in the ultraviolet region of the spectrum may burn the patient’s skin or may be hazardous to the operator’s eyes and are therefore removed. Of the 30 applicators tested, 6 IPLs measured more than 1% and two measured more than 2% of unwanted UV output below 400 nm when cut-off filters were set significantly higher.
The spectrum analysis of light emitted from flashlamps contains both discrete line structure and continuum radiation. The continuum radiation is blackbody radiation, characteristic of the temperature of the plasma in the discharge. Of 29 applicators 19 (65.5%) with cut-off filters that were inaccurate by more than 20 nm versus the claimed cut-off value given by the manufacturer. Only 10 applicators (34.5%) were within 20 nm of the stated cut-off.
Time-resolved spectrum sampled every 1 ms using an OceanOptics HR2000+ spectrometer and SpectraSuite software to demonstrate the stability and efficiency of spectral output for free-discharge (IPL ‘C’) vs. square pulse systems (IPL ‘E’)
IPL ‘C’—Free Discharge
IPL ‘E’—Square Pulse
IPL ‘D’ in a multi-pulse program showing more pronounced ‘free-discharge’ characteristics
Close “stacking” of sub-pulses produces a square pulse effect unless sub-pulses are spaced too far apart when they simply perform like conventional free-discharge pulses.
IPL ‘L’ showing sub-pulses in typical ‘free discharge’ format
IPL ‘K’ showing sub-pulses in typical ‘free discharge’ format
IPL ‘C’ showing a typical ‘free discharge’ of ca 3 ms of energy
Manufacturers operating an ISO 9000 Q/A system (Medical CE-mark) showed greater consistency of stated and actual values for fluence, pulse duration and spectral cut-off filter accuracy over the stated lifetime of the applicator / lamps.
Partial Discharge (‘square pulse’) Systems
Produce the lowest possible intensity for a given fluence thus minimising discomfort and other side effects such as skin burns (i.e. safer to use)
Free Discharge (‘rising/falling slope’) Systems
Produce high energy in short pulse durations with spectral shift and wasted energyCONCLUSIONS
Energist Ltd., Swansea, Wales, UK(www.energist-international.com)
Instinctive Technologies Ltd., Bedford, UK(www.instinctiveuk.com)
Lynton Lasers Ltd., Cheshire, UK(www.lynton.co.uk)Acknowledgements