Skip to main content
. 2010 Sep 28;5(9):e13053. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013053

Figure 1. Minimal tissue ablation with less damage of surrounding tissues by using the PIRL laser.

Figure 1

Transmission electron microscope (TEM) images of the incised skin. (A) PIRL laser (B) conventional laser (C) scalpel or the skin biopsy punch. Arrows show the incised edge of skin and arrowheads show adjacent tissues, which in PIRL laser incisions are intact. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) of skin at the cut borders. (D) The PIRL laser kept the collagen layer intact. (E) The conventional laser damaged (burned) skin and deformed the collagen fibres resulting in a damaged, irregular extracellular matrix surface. (F) The scalpel damaged the skin by shearing between the collagen fibres and exposing individual cells (Arrow shows an adiopocytes which is exposed in this image). (G) The PIRL laser generated a cutting gap of 8 µm. (H) Comparison of relative number of viable cells extracted from same volume of skin. Harvested cells subjected to Luminescent Cell Viability Assay. Mean and 95% confidence interval of luciferase activity has been shown here. * P<0.01 and ** P<0.001 shows a significant differences compare to viable cells extracted from PIRL laser incisions.