I am new to this site, but so far I am pleased with the level of professionalism, and the candor of all the experts here, especially LH, who seems to know lots about the Sciton BBL platform, one that I am investigating for a friend who owns a soon-to-be medspa, along with a few other companies. I've noticed in the "IPL Dog and Lemon Guide" that Sciton has at least 2 filters for hair reduction- 695 and 755nm. Yet, if you read the eBrochure they offer on their web-site, the 755 nm option is not listed. Does this filter adequately work on Fitzpatrick types 4-6?? Or has the company merely discontinued this filter in lieu of their Clearscan technology?? I don't feel that my friend is ready to go for a full-on laser suite just yet, so if anyone out there could lend their opinions on these matters, it would be greatly appreciated!!

BTW, it seems to me that, after all the research that I have done, no one else out there in Laser/IPL-land even mentions 755nm as a treatment wavelength...an oddity, no??

Luker
I am a Dermatologist in Europe and I have been using the Sciton BBL for 2,5 years.When i had purchased the BBL the 755nm filter was included.After one year the Sciton discontinued this filter.The reason for this as my local representative said was that 755nm was underpowered for hair removal!!Personally i don't agree with it.The BBL in 755nm has max fluence 19 J/cm2 at 20msec and 17 J/cm2 at 15msec which are ok for hair removal,especially in Fitz 4-5.If you want to compare it with Lumenis One which has also a 755nm filter with less max fluence think the difference in hair removal.In my office i have been also using for hair removal a Alex laser 755nm by Cynosure (not the Apogee,the older one) and i am working especially in Fitz 4-5 in 16-18 J/cm2 and at least 20msec,so i think that the BBL in 755nm has enough max fluence for hair removal.

I have a 1064 Nd:yag and use it mainly on my fitz 4 to 5. I do use the BBL on some that are not responding to the 1064. I live in an area where most pts are fitz 1 to 3. I have used the 1064 and the BBL on the same day for some pts.

Luker: Be sure you are not confusing 755 nm (Alexandrite) lasers with IPL systems using a 755 nm cut off filter. The 755 nm laser has been used a great deal the past ten years for hair removal and pigmented lesions but is only appropriate for Fitz I through III patients.

I am not aware of any IPLs with cut off filters higher than 690 nm. My guess would be that any IPL using a cut off at a point higher than 690 nm would be ineffective due to insufficient energy being allowed to get through the filter (for example with a 690 cut off filter all wavelengths below 690 nm are cut off due to the filter used).

Thanks to all for the replies...I think that IMO, the Sciton BBL/s or the Palomar Medilux are going to be the recommended choices I'll be making for my medspa friend.

BTW, in the same eBrochure from Sciton concerning their BBL/s, they mention the possibility of custom filters being available. Anyone know this for sure?? If so, I'll be choosing Sciton for sure!! Let me know...

LH-

What kind of settings are you using for the BBL hair removal on Fitz II/III pts? I have both the 640 and 695 filters.

Thanks!

fitz I-II i use the 590 usually 8 degree cooling. I will push as high as 24J and 15ms. I tend to rely on my 1064 but if they are not responding I will use the BBL. I even use them both on the same day. Just be careful and make sure they are not tanning. I have seen some superficial crusting start about 24 hours after treatment with the BBL. You can also do a second pass with the BBL.

Fitz III I will start with the 640 but sometimes will go to the 590.

Thanks, LH!

For the BBL hair removal in Fitz III-IV the 640 filter works very well in 14-15 J and 15msec for fine hair in III and 15-20msec for Fitz IV with cooling in 8 C.If you want more safety in Fitz IV use the 690 filter with 17-18 J and 15msec for fine hair or >20msec for medium hair.

Sorry wrong...i mean the 695nm filter (not 690)...

great, Charry, thanks!

Luker: the Medilux doen't have on-board epidermal cooling ( (I don't think it does), the Sciton does. This cooling provide an additional margin of safety to protect the epidermis. Palomar does have some cooling rollers to chill the skin prior to este or medilux txs; with the sciton you can dial in the cooling temp which is very nice

DermaRouge,

I checked out Palomar Medical,and you are absolutely correct! Seems like Sciton is looking better and better! And I will pose a question again...in the eBrochure that Sciton puts out concerning their BBL/s system, they mention the possibility of custom filters being design on request...anyone know this for sure?? So hard to get a hold of anyone at Sciton to confirm this!! Also,I have been looking at Omnilight from American Medical Bio-Care...know anything about it?? Looks interesting to me...

Charry

You have said earlier that you have personally treated up to Fitz 4/5 successfully using the 755 nm filter in BBL when performing hair reduction, yet there are some that have said it was risky...what gives?? I went on a search for some peer-reviewed papers on the subject, and have stumbled across one saying that at least a Fitz 4 was successfully treated with 755 nm (Alex Laser, though) light source. Any opinions out there on this?? The medspa is in an area where Fitz 1-4 are common, with the occasional 5. Not interested in a laser just yet, so any advice for now would be appreciated. Everyone else is also welcome to respond,as well!!

luker

The 755nm filter in BBL hair removal is working well in Fitz IV-V with adjustment of fluence and pulse width for each type pt.In Fitz IV you can also use safely either the 640 filter either (much better)the 695 filter at the settings as i said earlier.

Luker: 1. After trying to treat several hundred Fitz IV patients with the 755 nm Alex laser (Cynosure) my clinic gradually moved all Fitz IV and V patients to long pulsed Nd:YAG (1064 nm) for better results.

2. The Omnilight IPL does not have integrated epidermal cooling so I would say it is inferior to BBL. Just my opinion.

LH

I wondered how long you've been using the BBL for hair removal. I'm currently using a LightSheer, but am considering the BBL. I treat mostly Fitz II though IV. Can I expect comparable results? I'd appreciate any information or advice.

Thanks.

Thanx to all once again for your responses...been away for a while...it looks like Sciton wins this round!! So many here own and like the equipment they make, so I'm in, too!! Now, once again...DOES ANYONE KNOW ANYTHING FOR SURE ABOUT SCITON OFFERING OPTIONAL CUSTOM FILTERS?? I feel that everyone is avoiding the question. My rep seems to know nothing about this, yet the company literature suggests this as a possibility. Anyone??

Luker, I have no idea if the Sciton would make custom filters...but, it seems like that would be going out on a limb a bit if you are new to laser/light systems. Stick with the tried and true would be my advice. Also, all here are correct in that the Palomar Medilux does not have on-board cooling. However, that's palomar's older system and the starlux (which does have cooling) would be more of a comparison to the Sciton.

LDM,

The only reason that I am curious about this one point is that there are far more experienced people on this blog that are users of the BBL platform. This could mean that the company could create a custom wavelength filter for those seasoned practitioners that desire an in-house set of filter guides in their favorite wavelengths, unique to their practise. Remember that we're all here not only as professionals, but as retail service providers, and I feel private-label items go with this sort of exclusive service, so when I'm ready, I hope that this option is available to me, too!! I would guess it would be more cost-effective to purchase a custom filter than create an entire, distinct hand-piece. And, yes, the Starlux was one of my choices, because of its cooling capability.

I also believe that Sciton's 755 filter for the BBL combined with the chilled applicator worked well on type V skin and offered a greater margin of safety, however this filter was discontinued very soon after its release. I have been told it is because Sciton could show no clinical advantage of the 755 over the 695. Soon after the disappearance of the 755 however, came the ST (SkinTyte) accessory for the BBL. I suspect it is the 755 filter re-labelled with a different lamp drive algorithm and coding. Capable of producing pulsewidths in the order of seconds with delivered energies up to 150J/cm2, it is well suited to deep dermal heating. The latest BBL's still support the 755 filter because the entry in the calibration table has been maintained - so if you can get your hands on one, it will be recognised by the system.

Servicetech-

Do you (or your company) do Sciton Profile platform PM's and/or service calls?

Thanks.

Thanx, ServiceTech!! You think that the company may still have a few 'kicking around'?? Also, on a different issue, I was conversing with a rep from a competitor of Sciton, who claims to have been a laser service tech for Sciton a one time, and he told me that the coatings on the filters for the BBL tend to wear out rapidly, potentially exposing the patient to raw flash-lamp output, causing burns...Is this just an unkind jab, or a real concern?? I love the BBL/s, Better than Starlux!

Thank you for answering my question...I will be contacting my rep soon. Hope he can find this filter for me, as I have a growing clientèle of Fitz 4/5, but no 6's yet, so no real need for 1064 at the moment...always nice to have options for all. BTW, the last post raised a good point, even though it sounds like it came from a sales rep! What is your opinion??

In my experience, I have never seen a BBL filter with a worn coating so I would say it is an unkind jab. I have however seen many filters with small white halo's from dust particles exploding on the surface. Believe it or not, even these will clean off with a little pressure and lens cleaner. The BBL filters are very high quality dichroic metal film coating on a sapphire substrate. They are more expensive to produce but exhibit very good cut-off characteristics. They are not considered a "consumable". The main problem I see is operators inserting dusty filters into the handpiece causing white halo's to form on the rear face of the sapphire tip. These halo's do not seem to reduce the output but they do look unsightly. They can be cleaned but I would recommend leaving this to the engineer as it is possible to loose cleaning tissues inside the handpiece. I strongly recommend giving the filters a wipe with a microfiber cloth before insertion and always keep a filter installed to reduce dust ingress when the device is not in use.

Hi Luker,

In response to your enquiry about custom filters I would say the following; the current software has a calibration table for 420,515,560, 590,640,695,755 and ST filters. The 420 and the ST are band-pass filters while all the others are cut-off filters. I woluld imagine that if you were to have a "custom filter" made, you would also need to have an entry for this filter in the cal table as I would not imagine that Sciton would allow the use of a filter that could not be calibrated so I am not sure that custom filters are a reality. I think the current range of filters is sufficient for all the various applications, what extra filter would you like to see?

ServiceTech,

Finally, a reply to my original question!! As to what custom filters would be desired, a bandpass filter below 400nm and no higher than 420nm would be nice, to treat vitiligo and psoriasis, as well as a 525 nm, to treat darker pigments and for hair removal, like Palomar. One more thing, what's your opinion of systems like Sciton and Lumenis, with interchangeable filters, compared to dedicated handpiece systems like Palomar and Alma?? Any significant differences between the two??

I am wanting to know if anyone can help me with BBL Sciton hair removal setting. I am new to this laser for hair removal anyway. I am used to using the Lightsheer Diode laser. Am I always looking for follicular edema? If you get a chance please throw out some recommendations. Thank you.

Andrea: Sciton BBL is a PULSED LIGHT device-- NOT a laser. But the platform may also have a long pulsed Nd:YAG laser. Be sure to let us know which module you are using and what cut off filters you have. Doesn't Sciton provide you with recommended treatment parameter settings for each indication??? I'm sure they will if you ask.

Med Spa Guy:

So the sciton is a Nd; Yag 1064 for hair removal. The filters are 420, 515, 560, 590, 640, 695. Yes there are parameters given for all the fitz however, I feel that I am not getting the response I should be. I am used to using the lightsheer diode laser. An with that laser you can see erythema immediately or shortly after. If anyone has had experience with the sciton please share.. Thank you

Andrea: The Sciton device is a multi-platform system which can utilize a pulsed light platform called the "BBL" System (NOT a laser because it uses broadband light in various bandwidths depending which filter you use) AND/OR a long pulsed Nd:YAG (laser) module, AND/OR an ER:YAG laser module, etc. etc. depending on the number of indications you want to be able to treat and how much money you want to spend.

Advise on which 1064 laser is most effective for flushing associated with Rosacea

1064 should not be your first choice to treat flushing from rosacea. You should look at the pulsed dye laser as your first choice or an IPL.

Many companies (Cutera included) will try to tell you that the 1064 is a great choice for flushing but there are much better choices.