Feasibility Study of Electromagnetic Muscle Stimulation and Cryolipolysis for Abdominal Contouring.
Abdominal Muscles
/ radiation effects
Adult
Aged
Combined Modality Therapy
/ methods
Cryosurgery
/ adverse effects
Feasibility Studies
Female
Humans
Lipoabdominoplasty
/ adverse effects
Magnetic Field Therapy
/ adverse effects
Male
Middle Aged
Patient Satisfaction
Prospective Studies
Subcutaneous Fat, Abdominal
/ surgery
Treatment Outcome
Young Adult
Journal
Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.]
ISSN: 1524-4725
Titre abrégé: Dermatol Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9504371
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2020
10 2020
Historique:
entrez:
25
9
2020
pubmed:
26
9
2020
medline:
21
1
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In addition to reducing subcutaneous fat for body contouring, some patients are interested in toning the underlying muscle layer. This feasibility study evaluated the safety and efficacy of electromagnetic muscle stimulation (EMMS) alone, cryolipolysis alone, and cryolipolysis with EMMS for noninvasive contouring of abdomen. Abdomens of 50 subjects were treated in a study with 3 cohorts: EMMS alone, Cryolipolysis alone, and Cryolipolysis + EMMS in combination. Electromagnetic muscle stimulation treatments were delivered in 4 sessions over 2 weeks. Cryolipolysis treatments were delivered in one session. Combination treatments consisted of one cryolipolysis and 4 EMMS visits. Efficacy was assessed by independent physician Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS), circumferential measurement, Subject GAIS (SGAIS), and Body Satisfaction Questionnaire (BSQ). Safety was demonstrated for all study cohorts with no device- or procedure-related adverse events. Independent photo review showed greatest mean GAIS score for the Cryolipolysis + EMMS cohort followed by Cryolipolysis only, then EMMS only cohort. BSQ showed greatest average score increase for Cryolipolysis + EMMS cohort followed by Cryolipolysis only cohort, then EMMS only cohort. Mean circumferential reduction measurements were greatest for Cryolipolysis + EMMS cohort followed by Cryolipolysis only, and then EMMS only cohort. The mean SGAIS improvement score was equal for the Cryolipolysis only and Cryolipolysis + EMMS cohorts, followed by the EMMS only cohort. A multimodal approach using cryolipolysis and EMMS was safe and demonstrated enhanced body contouring efficacy for this feasibility study.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
In addition to reducing subcutaneous fat for body contouring, some patients are interested in toning the underlying muscle layer.
OBJECTIVE
This feasibility study evaluated the safety and efficacy of electromagnetic muscle stimulation (EMMS) alone, cryolipolysis alone, and cryolipolysis with EMMS for noninvasive contouring of abdomen.
METHODS
Abdomens of 50 subjects were treated in a study with 3 cohorts: EMMS alone, Cryolipolysis alone, and Cryolipolysis + EMMS in combination. Electromagnetic muscle stimulation treatments were delivered in 4 sessions over 2 weeks. Cryolipolysis treatments were delivered in one session. Combination treatments consisted of one cryolipolysis and 4 EMMS visits. Efficacy was assessed by independent physician Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS), circumferential measurement, Subject GAIS (SGAIS), and Body Satisfaction Questionnaire (BSQ).
RESULTS
Safety was demonstrated for all study cohorts with no device- or procedure-related adverse events. Independent photo review showed greatest mean GAIS score for the Cryolipolysis + EMMS cohort followed by Cryolipolysis only, then EMMS only cohort. BSQ showed greatest average score increase for Cryolipolysis + EMMS cohort followed by Cryolipolysis only cohort, then EMMS only cohort. Mean circumferential reduction measurements were greatest for Cryolipolysis + EMMS cohort followed by Cryolipolysis only, and then EMMS only cohort. The mean SGAIS improvement score was equal for the Cryolipolysis only and Cryolipolysis + EMMS cohorts, followed by the EMMS only cohort.
CONCLUSION
A multimodal approach using cryolipolysis and EMMS was safe and demonstrated enhanced body contouring efficacy for this feasibility study.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32976168
doi: 10.1097/DSS.0000000000002420
pii: 00042728-202010001-00004
pmc: PMC7515474
doi:
Types de publication
Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
S14-S21Références
Lasers Surg Med. 2017 Jan;49(1):63-68
pubmed: 27327898
Aesthet Surg J. 2013 Aug 1;33(6):835-46
pubmed: 23858510
Aesthet Surg J. 2017 Jun 01;37(6):715-722
pubmed: 28333359
Lasers Surg Med. 2015 Feb;47(2):120-7
pubmed: 25586980
Dermatol Surg. 2019 Dec;45(12):1542-1548
pubmed: 30882507
J Drugs Dermatol. 2018 Nov 01;17(11):1229-1232
pubmed: 30500146
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015 Jun;135(6):1581-1590
pubmed: 26017594
J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2019;21(4):238-242
pubmed: 30285505
J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2018 Feb;20(1):24-27
pubmed: 28850270
Aesthet Surg J. 2014 Mar;34(3):420-31
pubmed: 24598865
Aesthet Surg J. 2015 Jan;35(1):66-71
pubmed: 25568236
Lasers Surg Med. 2014 Jan;46(1):20-6
pubmed: 24338439
JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2017 Sep 01;19(5):350-357
pubmed: 28426847
Dermatol Surg. 2013 Aug;39(8):1209-16
pubmed: 23639062
J Cosmet Dermatol. 2018 Oct;17(5):783-787
pubmed: 30225976
Lasers Surg Med. 2016 Jan;48(1):3-13
pubmed: 26607045
Lasers Med Sci. 2015 Nov;30(8):2165-9
pubmed: 26100004
Lasers Surg Med. 2017 Sep;49(7):640-644
pubmed: 28464272
Lasers Surg Med. 2014 Dec;46(10):731-5
pubmed: 25395266
Dermatol Surg. 2015 Sep;41(9):1043-51
pubmed: 26218826
J Sports Sci Med. 2005 Mar 01;4(1):66-75
pubmed: 24431963
Lasers Surg Med. 2018 Mar 22;:
pubmed: 29566270
Lasers Surg Med. 2014 Feb;46(2):75-80
pubmed: 24535759
Dermatol Surg. 2019 Sep;45(9):1185-1190
pubmed: 30672856
J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2016 Jun;18(3):126-9
pubmed: 26735803
Lasers Surg Med. 2018 Jan 13;:
pubmed: 29331032
Dermatol Surg. 2017 Jul;43(7):940-949
pubmed: 28595246
Dermatol Surg. 2014 Sep;40(9):1004-9
pubmed: 25111437
Lasers Surg Med. 2019 Jan;51(1):40-46
pubmed: 30302767
Aesthet Surg J. 2015 Sep;35(7):830-6
pubmed: 26038367