ArticleThe Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology2015
The Benefit of Dual-frequency Ultrasound in Patients Treated by Injection Lipolysis.
Article in The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acoustic Waves in Axonal Membrane and Caveolins are the New Targets for Pain Treatment with High Frequency Ultrasound.Journal of pain research · 2020Article
- [Very high frequency ultrasound: New therapeutic method in aesthetic medicine and dermatology].Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess whether dual-frequency ultrasound can improve the treatment results of injection lipolysis (IL).
designRandomized, single-center pilot study. All subjects were treated with a contralateral control: one side of the body received the treatment with IL, whereas the symmetrical contralateral side received the combination of IL with dual-frequency ultrasound in a special form (LDM). Injections were provided subcutaneously in the depth of 8 to 12mm with a distance of nearly 15mm between the single injections. All subjects were treated with LDM once, 1 to 3 hours before the injection and twice per week after the injection.
settingKosmed Clinic, Kiel, Germany.
participantsSeven female healthy subjects with local body contouring problems in femoral or upper arm regions. MEASUREMENTS: Circumference was measured before and 6 to 8 weeks after treatment. Pain, hematoma, itching, burning sensation, redness, swelling, and pressure sensation were evaluated before the first treatment and 6 to 8 weeks for both contralateral sides.
resultsApplication of LDM in combination with IL improved the volume reduction compared to pure IL by 65.6 percent. The difference between IL and IL+LDM treated sides showed very high significance (p≤0.0001). Significant differences between IL and IL+LDM treated areas were found also in pain (p≤0.01). No statistical difference was found in all other subjective parameters.
conclusionApplication of LDM significantly increases the treatment success after IL and the acceptance of IL procedures by patients.
Identifiers
26345611PMC4557850W1442262273What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.