Yawen Wang MB, Jingchen Liang MB, Ying Chen MB, Jun Xia MD, Yanting Liu MD, Jing Liu MD, Youbao Li MB, Mengyao Yang MB, Zhao Wang MD, PhD, Weihui Zeng MB
{"title":"微聚焦超声波和精细脉冲光联合用于面部年轻化:一项前瞻性、随机和分脸研究。","authors":"Yawen Wang MB, Jingchen Liang MB, Ying Chen MB, Jun Xia MD, Yanting Liu MD, Jing Liu MD, Youbao Li MB, Mengyao Yang MB, Zhao Wang MD, PhD, Weihui Zeng MB","doi":"10.1002/lsm.23777","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>Public's interest in noninvasive skin rejuvenation treatments continues to grow. The advantage of combination therapy lies in that it can target different aspects of skin rejuvenation. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of microfocused ultrasound (MFU) combined with delicate pulsed light (DPL) for facial rejuvenation.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Twenty-one patients with facial relaxation were enrolled. All patients received whole-face MFU treatment, and one side of the face was randomly assigned to receive DPL. MFU treatment was performed at Months 0 and 3, while DPL treatment was performed at Months 1, 2, 4, and 5. The length and angle of the nasolabial fold and perioral wrinkles, melanin index (MI), erythema index (EI), transepidermal water loss (TEWL), and follow-up time were recorded at Months 0, 3, and 6. Side effects were recorded during treatment and each follow-up visit.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Twenty patients successfully completed the study. At the sixth month, the average length of perioral wrinkles and nasolabial folds on the combined side decreased by 11.5% (<i>p</i><sub>within</sub> < 0.001) and 6.5% (<i>p</i><sub>within</sub> = 0.011), while 8.3% (<i>p</i><sub>within</sub> = 0.012) and 3.8% (<i>p</i><sub>within</sub> = 0.02) on the MFU side. Compared with MFU treatment alone, the combined treatment also showed significant improvements in nasolabial fold angle (from 28.8 ± 3.4° to 32.7 ± 5.0°) and perioral wrinkle angle (from 39.3 ± 5.0° to 43.7 ± 5.1°). In addition, the combined side had greater benefits than the MFU side in improving MI, EI, TEWL, and skin elasticity (<i>p</i><sub>between</sub> < 0.05). Except for one patient who withdrew due to increased skin sensitivity after MFU treatment, other subjects did not experience permanent or serious side effects.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The combination of MFU and DPL for facial rejuvenation treatment is safe and effective. The combined treatment has better efficacy in skin firmness, and improving skin tone.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":17961,"journal":{"name":"Lasers in Surgery and Medicine","volume":"56 4","pages":"346-354"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Combined microfocused ultrasound and delicate pulsed light for facial rejuvenation: A prospective, randomized, and split-face study\",\"authors\":\"Yawen Wang MB, Jingchen Liang MB, Ying Chen MB, Jun Xia MD, Yanting Liu MD, Jing Liu MD, Youbao Li MB, Mengyao Yang MB, Zhao Wang MD, PhD, Weihui Zeng MB\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/lsm.23777\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>Public's interest in noninvasive skin rejuvenation treatments continues to grow. The advantage of combination therapy lies in that it can target different aspects of skin rejuvenation. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of microfocused ultrasound (MFU) combined with delicate pulsed light (DPL) for facial rejuvenation.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Twenty-one patients with facial relaxation were enrolled. All patients received whole-face MFU treatment, and one side of the face was randomly assigned to receive DPL. MFU treatment was performed at Months 0 and 3, while DPL treatment was performed at Months 1, 2, 4, and 5. The length and angle of the nasolabial fold and perioral wrinkles, melanin index (MI), erythema index (EI), transepidermal water loss (TEWL), and follow-up time were recorded at Months 0, 3, and 6. Side effects were recorded during treatment and each follow-up visit.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Twenty patients successfully completed the study. At the sixth month, the average length of perioral wrinkles and nasolabial folds on the combined side decreased by 11.5% (<i>p</i><sub>within</sub> < 0.001) and 6.5% (<i>p</i><sub>within</sub> = 0.011), while 8.3% (<i>p</i><sub>within</sub> = 0.012) and 3.8% (<i>p</i><sub>within</sub> = 0.02) on the MFU side. Compared with MFU treatment alone, the combined treatment also showed significant improvements in nasolabial fold angle (from 28.8 ± 3.4° to 32.7 ± 5.0°) and perioral wrinkle angle (from 39.3 ± 5.0° to 43.7 ± 5.1°). In addition, the combined side had greater benefits than the MFU side in improving MI, EI, TEWL, and skin elasticity (<i>p</i><sub>between</sub> < 0.05). Except for one patient who withdrew due to increased skin sensitivity after MFU treatment, other subjects did not experience permanent or serious side effects.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The combination of MFU and DPL for facial rejuvenation treatment is safe and effective. The combined treatment has better efficacy in skin firmness, and improving skin tone.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17961,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Lasers in Surgery and Medicine\",\"volume\":\"56 4\",\"pages\":\"346-354\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Lasers in Surgery and Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lsm.23777\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DERMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lasers in Surgery and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lsm.23777","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Combined microfocused ultrasound and delicate pulsed light for facial rejuvenation: A prospective, randomized, and split-face study
Objectives
Public's interest in noninvasive skin rejuvenation treatments continues to grow. The advantage of combination therapy lies in that it can target different aspects of skin rejuvenation. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of microfocused ultrasound (MFU) combined with delicate pulsed light (DPL) for facial rejuvenation.
Methods
Twenty-one patients with facial relaxation were enrolled. All patients received whole-face MFU treatment, and one side of the face was randomly assigned to receive DPL. MFU treatment was performed at Months 0 and 3, while DPL treatment was performed at Months 1, 2, 4, and 5. The length and angle of the nasolabial fold and perioral wrinkles, melanin index (MI), erythema index (EI), transepidermal water loss (TEWL), and follow-up time were recorded at Months 0, 3, and 6. Side effects were recorded during treatment and each follow-up visit.
Results
Twenty patients successfully completed the study. At the sixth month, the average length of perioral wrinkles and nasolabial folds on the combined side decreased by 11.5% (pwithin < 0.001) and 6.5% (pwithin = 0.011), while 8.3% (pwithin = 0.012) and 3.8% (pwithin = 0.02) on the MFU side. Compared with MFU treatment alone, the combined treatment also showed significant improvements in nasolabial fold angle (from 28.8 ± 3.4° to 32.7 ± 5.0°) and perioral wrinkle angle (from 39.3 ± 5.0° to 43.7 ± 5.1°). In addition, the combined side had greater benefits than the MFU side in improving MI, EI, TEWL, and skin elasticity (pbetween < 0.05). Except for one patient who withdrew due to increased skin sensitivity after MFU treatment, other subjects did not experience permanent or serious side effects.
Conclusions
The combination of MFU and DPL for facial rejuvenation treatment is safe and effective. The combined treatment has better efficacy in skin firmness, and improving skin tone.
期刊介绍:
Lasers in Surgery and Medicine publishes the highest quality research and clinical manuscripts in areas relating to the use of lasers in medicine and biology. The journal publishes basic and clinical studies on the therapeutic and diagnostic use of lasers in all the surgical and medical specialties. Contributions regarding clinical trials, new therapeutic techniques or instrumentation, laser biophysics and bioengineering, photobiology and photochemistry, outcomes research, cost-effectiveness, and other aspects of biomedicine are welcome. Using a process of rigorous yet rapid review of submitted manuscripts, findings of high scientific and medical interest are published with a minimum delay.