ReviewAesthetic plastic surgery2024
A Clinical Guide to the Treatment of Cellulite and Comprehensive Review of the Etiology, Pathophysiology, and Utility of Intervention.
Review in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An Innovative Injection Technique for Treating Edematous Fibrosclerotic Panniculopathy (Cellulite): A Prospective Multicenter Clinical Investigation.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCellulite is a common esthetic concern affecting most women. Despite its prevalence, there is no consensus on the optimal treatment approach for cellulite, partly due to the complex and multifactorial nature of its pathophysiology. Understanding the underlying biological processes along with available treatment options is important to be able to effectively counsel patients on effective management of this condition. This review aims to focus on high-quality evidence behind pathophysiology of cellulite, severity and grading, and its available treatment options.
methodsA comprehensive review of the literature was performed using PubMed and Embase databases. Manuscripts that provided objective data with respect to pathophysiology, grading scales, and applications of treatment options were utilized.
resultsUsing the existing CSS classification, an evidence-based algorithm is proposed for treatment of cellulite. Mild cellulite is best served with lifestyle modifications such as healthy diet, hydration, and exercise. Use of topicals in mild cellulite patients as adjuncts to lifestyle modifications have the highest efficacy, although there are inconsistent data on topical treatments. Moderate cellulite is best targeted with noninvasive treatment options including laser therapy, radiofrequency, and ultrasound. Radiofrequency demonstrates the strongest efficacy in the current peer-reviewed literature. Severe cellulite is recommended to be treated with minimally invasive approaches such as subcision and injectables.
conclusionCellulite is a challenging cosmetic problem to treat, and thus multimodal treatment options should be considered in an attempt to achieve optimal outcomes and patient satisfaction. As the pathophysiology of cellulite is further elucidated, more targeted treatments may be developed in the future. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
38057600What 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.