1
Physiology & Medicine / What's the future of tattoo removal?
« on: 10/08/2022 21:55:11 »
Short overview for those that aren't into it:
Goldstandard for about 4 decades: Laser Removal. Not much innovation, almost no research regarding novel avenues.
More and more criticism regarding toxicology (toxic byproducts, unknown remains of particles in the body).
Frustrating for patients (pain, time, money). Until today, no real treatment option for allergies. Really grounded in dermatology. Good additional income source. Very contradictory information for patients, caused by no uniform scientific basis for claims or against them ("you will poo it out, you will pee it out, it'll get stuck in your system, you should get massages, you should space treatments, your liver will process it, your kidneys will,...). Who should wonder about this, if even the french study that finally found out abut the role of the macrophages is from 2018
In my opinion we have no clues and even doctors are simply overwhelmed by the complexity of this indication. Laser providers are actually educating dermatologists. It's quite a lobby. But we're at a paradigm shift as at least some patents currently came up that aim to change the market. So we got:
ClearIT Inc - Cold plasma based cell lysis with additional suction for pigment extraction
Extatin - Only decade long thoroughly research project by renowned cell physiologists that aims for dragging the macrophages out that contain the ink. Drug based approach.
Cytrellis - Has fractional tattoo removal in it's patent, removing tiny full-thickness cores without leaving scars
Harvard Patent (Dr. Garibyan and Rox Anderson) - Wants to use enzymes and "dermal lavage" with additional suction to suck the ink out
Different reasons of skepticism. First of all. With CAP (ClearIT), we have a new source of possibly strongly cytotoxic sources, and byproducts in contact with ink components. With the additional lavage and suction idea, we'd even create "plasma activated liquids" and basically have no control over it. It might diffuse elsewhere in the skin (maybe even neighbouring tattoos might be affected), suction might not get everything out. Also the dense capillaries in the dermis will really likely absorb a lot of it, so their promises for more safety by "extraction" might be snake oil.
Same with the Harvard patent. How should it pass those capillaries? Especially with pressure as they want to apply.
Extatin is promising but has to show it's effects and safety first.
Cytrellis is hard to imagine for effective removal at this point.
What could be a solution that solves the current issues in the (near) future? Could certain biomaterials be the answer soon? Could we create microliquids, hydrogels or further in the future even certain bots, that are able to encapsulate the ink laden cells and/or particles while preventing absorption? What would it take?
Also I lately became interested in hydrogel coated needles. Could we create a needle size, coated with an adhesive but biocompatible gel for example, that targets the cells and is appliable in a quite dense pattern without causing scarring? Could those coatings be adhesive enough to even prevent uptake by ruptured capillaries? How could we make a needle take up more cells/particles at once?
Or should it be fully hydrogel forming needles, maybe with swelling properties that evolve once in the dermis?
I think if we really looked into this thoroughly, there could be completely new approaches.
I would love the communities opinion on this. I can just recommend this field of research to any Prof, any lab for biotechnology, experimental dermatology, etc.
What we'd probably need is a translational project though.
Hope for some brainstorming.
Goldstandard for about 4 decades: Laser Removal. Not much innovation, almost no research regarding novel avenues.
More and more criticism regarding toxicology (toxic byproducts, unknown remains of particles in the body).
Frustrating for patients (pain, time, money). Until today, no real treatment option for allergies. Really grounded in dermatology. Good additional income source. Very contradictory information for patients, caused by no uniform scientific basis for claims or against them ("you will poo it out, you will pee it out, it'll get stuck in your system, you should get massages, you should space treatments, your liver will process it, your kidneys will,...). Who should wonder about this, if even the french study that finally found out abut the role of the macrophages is from 2018
In my opinion we have no clues and even doctors are simply overwhelmed by the complexity of this indication. Laser providers are actually educating dermatologists. It's quite a lobby. But we're at a paradigm shift as at least some patents currently came up that aim to change the market. So we got:
ClearIT Inc - Cold plasma based cell lysis with additional suction for pigment extraction
Extatin - Only decade long thoroughly research project by renowned cell physiologists that aims for dragging the macrophages out that contain the ink. Drug based approach.
Cytrellis - Has fractional tattoo removal in it's patent, removing tiny full-thickness cores without leaving scars
Harvard Patent (Dr. Garibyan and Rox Anderson) - Wants to use enzymes and "dermal lavage" with additional suction to suck the ink out
Different reasons of skepticism. First of all. With CAP (ClearIT), we have a new source of possibly strongly cytotoxic sources, and byproducts in contact with ink components. With the additional lavage and suction idea, we'd even create "plasma activated liquids" and basically have no control over it. It might diffuse elsewhere in the skin (maybe even neighbouring tattoos might be affected), suction might not get everything out. Also the dense capillaries in the dermis will really likely absorb a lot of it, so their promises for more safety by "extraction" might be snake oil.
Same with the Harvard patent. How should it pass those capillaries? Especially with pressure as they want to apply.
Extatin is promising but has to show it's effects and safety first.
Cytrellis is hard to imagine for effective removal at this point.
What could be a solution that solves the current issues in the (near) future? Could certain biomaterials be the answer soon? Could we create microliquids, hydrogels or further in the future even certain bots, that are able to encapsulate the ink laden cells and/or particles while preventing absorption? What would it take?
Also I lately became interested in hydrogel coated needles. Could we create a needle size, coated with an adhesive but biocompatible gel for example, that targets the cells and is appliable in a quite dense pattern without causing scarring? Could those coatings be adhesive enough to even prevent uptake by ruptured capillaries? How could we make a needle take up more cells/particles at once?
Or should it be fully hydrogel forming needles, maybe with swelling properties that evolve once in the dermis?
I think if we really looked into this thoroughly, there could be completely new approaches.
I would love the communities opinion on this. I can just recommend this field of research to any Prof, any lab for biotechnology, experimental dermatology, etc.
What we'd probably need is a translational project though.
Hope for some brainstorming.