Oh FracTat... About 10 years ago my father (Lorenzo Kunze Sr.) and I began experimenting with the layering of Co2 fractional and QS (1064nm and 755nm) treatments, for the purpose of improving tattoo removal results, reducing scar tissue caused by tattooing, and fixing adverse reactions caused by other technicians. During the next few years of research, we were able to develop several protocols (CoTatt2), which produced great results for clients that had a high concentration of ink and for those who had very stubborn tattoos (reached the 10+ treatment mark). Even though these treatments resulted in improved outcomes (scar reduction caused by tattooist) and we were able to lower treatment counts; teaching these methods were difficult, because at the time most tattoo removal facilities were not equipped w/ both Co2 fractional and QS lasers. This lack of access was also a result of state regulations on ablative devices and the additional expense of having two 100k+ devices. Over the years I must have pleaded with every major manufacturer to produce a high quality Co2/QS combo, but the closest anyone has come to date, is Cynosure with the introduction of its PicoSure’s Focus HP (not my first choice for scar reduction, because you are unable to control depth or distance of the micro thermal holes, but it still does a great job of adding additional treatments to a clinics menu).
When I heard that Fotona was coming out with a "fractional" device that was designed to assist in the removal process, I was initially very excited to hear that someone was finally going to bring this concept to life… After doing some research on the FrcaTat method, I began to wonder what the regulatory limitations for non-medical professionals where going to be, and more importantly was my concern for the safety of its purposed treatment protocol. From what I have been able to gather from a few colleagues, articles, and a sales rep; it seems like Fotona has decided to couple this technology with another desperate attempt to revive the zombie protocol r20 method (it wont die, lol). In my professional opinion, these type of treatments produce an excess amount of thermal tissue damage, they increase the probability of adverse reactions, extend at home healing time, limit skin types that can be treated, and inevitably cause skin fatigue on the epidermis. Sadly when it comes to marketing devices it seems like the manufactures in this industry still have not gotten pass the old "more power fixes everything" philosophy; when they should be more interested in producing options and devices that address the many other, and more important variables involved in efficiently removing ink from skin.
In closing, I believe my concerns are extremely valid, when choosing to bring this or any other new technologies into your practice for public use. With that being said, I am still very excited to continue my research and eventually testing this device. If used in a safer manor, it should in theory offer assistance with scar reduction, resurfacing, ink agitation, and the removal of unwanted tattoos. Its accessibility and acceptance will ultimately depend on how effective its treatments can be, the price of the device, per treatment ROI, and if the publics demand determines it popularity.
Thank you for taking the time to read this ILA blog. I am always looking to learn more, to teach more, so if you are using, testing or know someone who has access to this device I would love to hear more about your FracTat experience. Also if you have any questions or would like to talk privately about this new technology, please do not hesitate to email or direct message me anytime.
Fotona FracTat Protocol:
Treat with FracTat (fractional)
Treat w/ 1064 for QS
Wait 5 minutes
Repeat QS tx 3-6 times, waiting 5 min between each tx.
Lorenzo Kunze, II CLS/MLS
Owner & Lead Instructor
International Laser Academy