Displaying all 2 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Park JY, Lin F, Suwanchinda A, Wanitphakdeedecha R, Yu J, Lim TS, et al.
    J Clin Aesthet Dermatol, 2021 May;14(5):E70-E79.
    PMID: 34188753
    BACKGROUND: Noninvasive facial-rejuvenation devices, such as nonablative radiofrequency (RF) and laser-assisted technology, are increasingly replacing higher-risk surgeries for face and body skin laxity. OBJECTIVE: We sought to review published information on noninvasive energy device safety and efficacy in aesthetic skin tightening, compare these with our experiences in Asian patients, and disseminate a consensus for optimizing microfocused ultrasound with visualization (MFU-V) in Asian patients. METHODS: A broad, nonexhaustive, nonsystematic literature search of published studies indexed in PubMed was performed to compare selected energy technologies to MFU-V for noninvasive face and body skin tightening, in particular, among Asian patients. This was supplemented with internal documents to provide evidence and support arguments if no peer-reviewed data were available. RESULTS: We highlighted the differences between devices and platforms and identified factors requiring attention and caution. Due to the increase in new devices lacking strong supporting clinical evidence of both safety and efficacy in Asia, it is necessary to convene physicians with substantial experience in MFU-V and devise a consensus on Asian patient selection, treatment planning, and customization. CONCLUSION: Many platforms duplicate or claim similar technologies, efficacy, or safety without significant peer-reviewed scientific or clinical evidence. We showed that MFU-V satisfies this clinical imperative. Further, the patented DeepSEE® technology allows users to noninvasively "see" through the skin to ensure treatment precision, facilitate optimal skin lifting and tightening, and enhance patient comfort and safety. Therefore, we believe that MFU-V is the gold standard for nonsurgical lifting and skin tightening.
  2. Artzi O, Cohen JL, Dover JS, Suwanchinda A, Pavicic T, Landau M, et al.
    PMID: 32547150 DOI: 10.2147/CCID.S247171
    Background and Objectives: There is a wide diversity of opinions regarding the management of delayed inflammatory reactions (DIRs) secondary to hyaluronic acid (HA)-based fillers. The plethora of approaches has led the authors to conduct a review regarding management and treatment of DIRs as well as establish therapeutic guidelines for this purpose.

    Materials and Methods: A review of the literature was performed through databases such as PubMed using keywords including HA-fillers and complications, delayed HA filler sequelae and therapy, soft tissue and dermal filler reactions and management. Additionally, a survey comprised of questions regarding the management and treatment of DIRs was sent to 18 physicians highly experienced with soft-tissue filler injections in 10 countries. Their answers and recommendations were analyzed and debated amongst these panelists.

    Results: Sixteen panelists favored antibiotic therapy as first-line treatment for DIRs, specifically dual antibiotic therapy consisting of a fluoroquinolone along with a tetracycline or macrolide for a period of 3-6 weeks. The majority refrained from the use of intralesional (IL) or systemic steroids except in the case of disfiguring or recalcitrant reactions. IL hyaluronidase was recommended by 13 panelists; however, some preferred a watchful waiting approach for a period of 48 hours to 2 weeks prior to IL hyaluronidase, and in cases where antibiotics did not lead to improvement.

    Conclusion: A consensus was reached and summarized to propose a clear, easy-to-follow, stepwise algorithm for the treatment of DIRs.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links