of complications and treatment of same. While the manual involves IPL + RF, I found the explanations for adverse outcomes to be very interesting. Also the recommended tx's for complications.
One interesting bit was that adverse outcomes can result from fluences used that were too high for the patient's skin type, along w/misdiagnoses of skin type. I also found a webinar by Sciton where the presenter comments that in his experience, a number of patients w/ adverse outcomes had light eyes/skin but a grandparent with brown eyes/darker skin, and he now recommends that the treater ask what a patient's parents and grandparents look like, as he suspects that some people may appear to be a lighter Fitzpatrick type than their ancestry would reveal - that they should be classified as a darker Fitz type than they appear to be. Darker Fitz types require different settings.
I am wondering if my bad outcome may involve in part this issue of misdx of skin type, as I have light eyes (blue/green), dark blonde hair and skin that really only appears to be very fair because I am religious about spf and take doxy and retinA. Whe I got my medical records, I saw that the Dr. wrote that my skin type was Fitzpatrick II, and when we started the IPL tx, she commented, hmm your skin is very fair so .. and I think she then increased the settings.
However, my understanding of Fitz II is that it is skin that "usually burns, tans minimally" and has blonde hair and "white" skin. I am prone to burn more often now than I would naturally but only because I take doxy for rosacea (low dose) and retinA for acne. Naturally, my skin tans quite well and only burns sometimes. I am also more of a very pale yellow than white. And I have one grandparent w/ eyes so dark brown they look black, and dark brown hair. But I was not asked about this. So, along w/ machine variability and device risk, we may have more misdx of skin type leading to more aggresive settings than are appropriate, no?
http://www.mulhollandmd.com/mdu/discipl ... pter33.pdf