We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Original Investigation |

Gaseous and Particulate Content of Laser Hair Removal Plume ONLINE FIRST

Gary S. Chuang, MD1,2; William Farinelli, BA1; David C. Christiani, MD3,4; Robert F. Herrick, ScD4; Norman C. Y. Lee, PhD5; Mathew M. Avram, MD1
[+] Author Affiliations
1Wellman Center for Photomedicine, Department of Dermatology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston
2Division of Dermatology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
3Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston
4Department of Environmental Health, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
5Chemical Instrumentation Center, Department of Chemistry, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts
JAMA Dermatol. Published online July 06, 2016. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.2097
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Importance  Potentially harmful chemicals are released when tissues are vaporized. Laser hair removal (LHR) causes heating and often vaporization of hairs, producing both a signature malodorous plume and visible particulates.

Objective  To characterize the chemical composition and quantify the ultrafine particle content of the plume generated during LHR.

Design, Setting, and Participants  In the laser center of a large academic hospital, discarded terminal hairs from the trunk and extremities were collected from 2 adult volunteers. The hair samples were sealed in glass gas chromatography chambers and treated with a laser. The laser plume was analyzed by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS). During LHR treatment, two 6-L negative pressure canisters were used to capture 30 seconds of laser plume, and a portable condensation particle counter was used to measure ultrafine particulates (<1 µm). Ultrafine particle concentrations were measured within the treatment room, within the waiting room, and outside the building.

Main Outcomes and Measures  The chemical content of the laser plume was analyzed with GC-MS and screened for aerosolized toxins using Environmental Protection Agency–certified methods. The ambient concentration of ultrafine particles during LHR was measured by condensation particle counters.

Results  Analysis with GC-MS identified 377 chemical compounds. Sixty-two of these compounds, of which 13 are known or suspected carcinogens and more than 20 are known environmental toxins, exhibited strong absorption peaks. During LHR, the portable condensation particle counters documented an 8-fold increase compared with the ambient room baseline level of ultrafine particle concentrations (ambient room baseline, 15 300 particles per cubic centimeter [ppc]; LHR with smoke evacuator, 129 376 ppc), even when a smoke evacuator was in close proximity (5.0 cm) to the procedure site. When the smoke evacuator was turned off for 30 seconds, there was a more than 26-fold increase in particulate count compared with ambient baseline levels (ambient baseline, 15 300 ppc; LHR without smoke evacuator for 30 seconds, 435 888 ppc).

Conclusions and Relevance  These findings establish the concern that the burning-hair plume often present during LHR should be considered a biohazard, warranting the use of smoke evacuators, good ventilation, and respiratory protection, especially for health care workers with prolonged exposure to LHR plume.

Figures in this Article


Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Ultrafine Particle (UFP) Count Assessed From the Angle of the Laser Hair Removal (LHR) Practitioner and Patient

Time-series measurement of UFP concentration during an LHR treatment. The UFP concentration varied significantly when measured from the angle of the LHR practitioner vs the angle of the patient. ppc indicates particles per cubic centimeter.

Graphic Jump Location




Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles