Jump to content

Photo

Fraxel 1550 Versus Starlux1540?

ice pick fraxel

2 replies to this topic

#1 ttll

ttll

    New Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 8
    Likes: 0
About Me
  • Joined: 10-January 13

Posted 23 January 2013 - 09:43 AM

I visited two places for consultations.

 

The first place is the cosmetic center under Johns Hopkins Hospital. The doctor who is also the director of the center recommended to me Fraxel 1550, which is non-alative.

 

The second place is Maryland Laser, Skin & Vein institute, owned by Dr Weiss. The one that saw me was a medical assistant. She recommended Palomar Icon system with 1540 fractional laser handpiece.  My impression from their information is that they seem to have more laser equipments than the first place (ie the one at Johns Hopkins Hospital).

 

1. I was wondering what strengths and weakness are between the two laser equipments? The second place said Palomar Starlux 1540 can go deeper than Fraxel 1550. I am not sure if it means a good thing?

 

2. Both places said that the procedures might be done by a different person ( a fellow, and a nurse). But I can request the main doctors in these places, if I am willing to pay more. Not sure if that will make difference?

 

In case that it may help, I am eastern asian, almost never get burn and only tan. According to the second place, I have ice pick and rolling scars on my cheeks. In particular, some acne scars make one nose-to-mouth fold look worse by doubling it.

 

Thanks!

 



#2 jbird12

jbird12

    Member

  • Veteran Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 144
    Likes: 5
About Me
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined: 27-July 04

Posted 23 January 2013 - 05:56 PM

I've been treated by Dr. (Robert) Weiss with both of the lasers you mentioned at his Maryland Laser office.  I don't know how severe your scarring is but for my rolling and boxscars, neither one of these lasers did much to show noticeable improvement.  I was treated approximately 10 times over a number of years (I think 4 or 5 times one year and 4 or 5 times a few years later).  Dr. Weiss does recommend the Palomar over the Fraxel due to the Optic XD head that he uses which is supposed to be able to penetrate deeper. Results may vary but it didn't work for me.

 

I would categorize my scarring as moderate but prevalent with a few deeper boxscars.  I don't think my lack of improvement was due to skill of doctor but due to type of treatment.  Only thing that has worked for me has been Fractional CO2. 



#3 ttll

ttll

    New Member

  • Members
  • Posts & Likes
    Posts: 8
    Likes: 0
About Me
  • Joined: 10-January 13

Posted 23 January 2013 - 08:42 PM

Thank you so much, jbird12!

 

If I understand correctly, Fractional CO2 is ablative. I am eastern asian, so pigment issues are the reason why the two places don't recommend ablative lasers such as Fraxel Repair to me. But if there is a good chance that the ablative ones won't cause any pigment problem to me, I certainly want to have a try.

 

I've been treated by Dr. (Robert) Weiss with both of the lasers you mentioned at his Maryland Laser office.  I don't know how severe your scarring is but for my rolling and boxscars, neither one of these lasers did much to show noticeable improvement.  I was treated approximately 10 times over a number of years (I think 4 or 5 times one year and 4 or 5 times a few years later).  Dr. Weiss does recommend the Palomar over the Fraxel due to the Optic XD head that he uses which is supposed to be able to penetrate deeper. Results may vary but it didn't work for me.

 

I would categorize my scarring as moderate but prevalent with a few deeper boxscars.  I don't think my lack of improvement was due to skill of doctor but due to type of treatment.  Only thing that has worked for me has been Fractional CO2. 


Edited by ttll, 23 January 2013 - 08:44 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users