A randomized intraindividual comparative study evaluating the effects of two ultrasound-assisted liposuction devices on the abdomen.
Márquez-Gutiérrez EA., Tamez-Pedroza L., Morales-Naya ED., Vélez-Palafox M., Cuartero-Castro G., Zacaula-Juárez N.
Prospective Study, published in J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Prospective Study
- Journal
- J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg (2024)
- Country
- Netherlands
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 38733713
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.bjps.2024.04.040
Abstract (original English)
Ultrasound-assisted liposuction (UAL) has become popular because of its favorable outcomes in fat emulsification, blood loss reduction, and skin tightening. This study aimed to compare the effects of two UAL devices on the abdomen by assessing postsurgery skin biomechanical properties. This single-blind, prospective study (2020-2022) involved 13 liposuction procedures performed on patients without chronic diseases. Each patient's abdomen was divided vertically from the xiphoid to the perineum. Vibration amplification of sound energy at resonance (VASER)-assisted liposuction (Solta Medical, Inc., Hayward, CA) was performed on one half, while the other half underwent liposuction with high-frequency ultrasound energy (HEUS)-assisted technology. Skin biomechanical measurements, including distensibility, net elasticity, biological elasticity, hydration, erythema, melanin, and skin firmness, were taken at 12 and 24 months postsurgery, focusing on the anterior abdomen, 8 cm to the right and left of the umbilicus. Analysis of the above skin biomechanical measurements revealed no significant differences between the HEUS and VASER devices, except for skin firmness, which showed a notable increase following HEUS surgery. Patient-perceived clinical differences were assessed via nonvalidated questionnaires, revealing no distinctions between devices. Biomechanical skin results post-UAL surge
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
Evidence level
Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.