Member Comments are provided by individuals and reflect their personal opinions only. Under NO circumstances should you act on any advice or opinion posted in this forum. ALWAYS check with your personal physician before taking any action regarding your health! MedHelp International and our partners, sponsors and affiliates have no obligation to monitor any comments posted on this site, or the content and/or accuracy of such exchanges. MedHelp International does not endorse the views of any user.
Dermatology (Expert Forum)
Electrosurgery vs. Pulsed Dye Laser
Answered by
Alan Rockoff, MD - dermatology, Child Skin Problems
The Rockoff Dermatology Center
Brookline - MA
Welcome to the DERMATOLOGY FORUM! Questions in this forum are answered by Dermatologists from St. Luke's Roosevelt Hospital, under the direction of Andrew Alexis, M.D., M.P.H.
Electrosurgery vs. Pulsed Dye Laser
by moxfulder1, Nov 16, 2004 12:00AM
Dr. Rockoff,
This is in reference to my question posted on 10/29/2004, concerning my recalcitrant, growing wart, which I've had for 2+ years.
You suggested that electrosurgery might be worth considering. After performing some web research (i.e. reviewing various surgery methods), I find Pulsed Dye Laser the most attractive type of surgery, and wanted to hear your comments on this (I will of course speak to at least 2 doctors in person before making decision).
My biggest problem with the wart over the past 2 years has been its tendency to spread to the "good" surrounding skin when that tissue has been damaged (e.g. if liquid nitrogen is applied slightly liberally, the wart spreads to all the damaged areas). Today, a mini wart popped up about 1.5cm away from the center or the original, big wart. The mini wart is located in the exact area where i had accidentally cut my skin with a pumice stone, and i'm assuming somehow the virus hopped into the cut.
Anyhow, pulsed dye laser seems attractive to me because 1) it's not very invasive and 2) it doesn't rely on damaging otherwise good skin. My understanding is that PDL is used on baby's faces, of all things. It is clear to be that any method I use which can potentially cause damage to healthy skin is going to lead to the virus taking over the damaged skin. I've witness, slowly but surely, every piece of damaged skin get infected by the virus in the weeks following the initial injury to the healthy skin.
I know you can't predict whether the PDL will work, but do you think I'm correct to think that, of the more aggressive treatments (i.e. electrosurgery, C02 laser, PDL laser), that the PDL laser is likely the most innocuous?
After having this thing for 2+ years and watching it slowly, but surely, grow and spread in its area, I've lose faith in the "wait and see" approach. Additionally, any method which involves damageing good skin (nitrogen/salicyclic acid) just makes the wart bigger.
Please advise-- do you think exploring the option of PDL is a good idea, or should I just accept my rock (to borrow from Sisyphus, if I may), and leave this wart untreated forever (i refuse to have it hit with liquid nitrogen again).
Thanks.
This is in reference to my question posted on 10/29/2004, concerning my recalcitrant, growing wart, which I've had for 2+ years.
You suggested that electrosurgery might be worth considering. After performing some web research (i.e. reviewing various surgery methods), I find Pulsed Dye Laser the most attractive type of surgery, and wanted to hear your comments on this (I will of course speak to at least 2 doctors in person before making decision).
My biggest problem with the wart over the past 2 years has been its tendency to spread to the "good" surrounding skin when that tissue has been damaged (e.g. if liquid nitrogen is applied slightly liberally, the wart spreads to all the damaged areas). Today, a mini wart popped up about 1.5cm away from the center or the original, big wart. The mini wart is located in the exact area where i had accidentally cut my skin with a pumice stone, and i'm assuming somehow the virus hopped into the cut.
Anyhow, pulsed dye laser seems attractive to me because 1) it's not very invasive and 2) it doesn't rely on damaging otherwise good skin. My understanding is that PDL is used on baby's faces, of all things. It is clear to be that any method I use which can potentially cause damage to healthy skin is going to lead to the virus taking over the damaged skin. I've witness, slowly but surely, every piece of damaged skin get infected by the virus in the weeks following the initial injury to the healthy skin.
I know you can't predict whether the PDL will work, but do you think I'm correct to think that, of the more aggressive treatments (i.e. electrosurgery, C02 laser, PDL laser), that the PDL laser is likely the most innocuous?
After having this thing for 2+ years and watching it slowly, but surely, grow and spread in its area, I've lose faith in the "wait and see" approach. Additionally, any method which involves damageing good skin (nitrogen/salicyclic acid) just makes the wart bigger.
Please advise-- do you think exploring the option of PDL is a good idea, or should I just accept my rock (to borrow from Sisyphus, if I may), and leave this wart untreated forever (i refuse to have it hit with liquid nitrogen again).
Thanks.
Doctor's Answer
by Alan Rockoff, MD, Nov 17, 2004 12:00AM
, Nov 17, 2004 12:00AM
Yes, I think the pulsed dye laser is a good idea. It is gentle, as you say, though it may be uncomfortable. The major drawback would be cost--before you undertake treatment, you ought to check to see whether insurance will be picking up the bill. It may take several treatments, and paying for laser treatments out of pocket can be tough.
Good luck.
Dr. Rockoff
Good luck.
Dr. Rockoff
