Comparative Analysis of Cellulite Treatment Modalities: A Systematic Review

Comparative Analysis of Cellulite Treatment Modalities: A Systematic Review

Cellulite is a highly prevalent and aesthetically distressing skin condition. Whilst there are a variety of treatment modalities, none are definitively established. This systematic review aims to assess invasive and noninvasive treatment modalities for cellulite management. The review protocol was p...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Aesthetic plastic surgery 2024-11
Hauptverfasser: Lim, Su Kwan, Gultekin, Gozde, Suresan, Srutti, Jacob, Anu, Zou, Yutong, Liyanage, Dinithi D, Parekh, Jvalant N, Mavilakandy, Akash K, Vyas, Krishna, Khajuria, Ankur
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title Aesthetic plastic surgery
container_volume
creator Lim, Su Kwan
Gultekin, Gozde
Suresan, Srutti
Jacob, Anu
Zou, Yutong
Liyanage, Dinithi D
Parekh, Jvalant N
Mavilakandy, Akash K
Vyas, Krishna
Khajuria, Ankur
description Cellulite is a highly prevalent and aesthetically distressing skin condition. Whilst there are a variety of treatment modalities, none are definitively established. This systematic review aims to assess invasive and noninvasive treatment modalities for cellulite management. The review protocol was published and registered a priori (PROSPERO CRD42022359334). A comprehensive electronic search for relevant randomised controlled trials, (RCTs) was performed in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science databases. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using Cochrane's risk of bias tool, respectively. Overall, 753 studies were initially identified, of which 24 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) satisfied the eligibility criteria with a total of 2084 patients with a mean follow-up of 3.33 ± 13.4 weeks. Evaluated interventions included mechanical stimulation, topical therapy, shock wave therapy (SWT), laser and light-based devices, radiofrequency therapy, subcutaneous injectables, and ultrasound. SWT emerged as a standout intervention, demonstrating a consistent cellulite reduction score of 2.07 ± 0.39 across four studies. Radiofrequency therapy exhibited a statistically significant reduction of thigh circumference (- 2.09 cm, p 
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s00266-024-04365-8
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3128979342</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3128979342</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c184t-6fdde7ef54ad2d6c7d1bfce00a0cbf93e382374f1a71554b9b0968c9034618273</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kEtLw0AUhQdRbK3-ARcySzej88o83JXgCyuCVnA3TCZ3IJI0NZNU-u-NVl1dOJzvcPkQOmX0glGqLxOlXClCuSRUCpURs4emTApOMi7ZPppSoSThTL1N0FFK75QyrrU8RBNhM6mtkVP0kLfN2ne-rzaA5ytfb1OVcBtxDnU91FUPeNmB7xtY9fixLf0YVZCu8By_bFMPzUgG_AybCj6P0UH0dYKT3ztDrzfXy_yOLJ5u7_P5ggRmZE9ULEvQEDPpS16qoEtWxACUehqKaAUIw4WWkXnNskwWtqBWmWCpkIoZrsUMne921137MUDqXVOlMP7rV9AOyQnGjdVWSD5W-a4aujalDqJbd1Xju61j1H1LdDuJbpTofiQ6M0Jnv_tD0UD5j_xZE1_OQm0S</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3128979342</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparative Analysis of Cellulite Treatment Modalities: A Systematic Review</title><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Lim, Su Kwan ; Gultekin, Gozde ; Suresan, Srutti ; Jacob, Anu ; Zou, Yutong ; Liyanage, Dinithi D ; Parekh, Jvalant N ; Mavilakandy, Akash K ; Vyas, Krishna ; Khajuria, Ankur</creator><creatorcontrib>Lim, Su Kwan ; Gultekin, Gozde ; Suresan, Srutti ; Jacob, Anu ; Zou, Yutong ; Liyanage, Dinithi D ; Parekh, Jvalant N ; Mavilakandy, Akash K ; Vyas, Krishna ; Khajuria, Ankur</creatorcontrib><description>Cellulite is a highly prevalent and aesthetically distressing skin condition. Whilst there are a variety of treatment modalities, none are definitively established. This systematic review aims to assess invasive and noninvasive treatment modalities for cellulite management. The review protocol was published and registered a priori (PROSPERO CRD42022359334). A comprehensive electronic search for relevant randomised controlled trials, (RCTs) was performed in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science databases. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using Cochrane's risk of bias tool, respectively. Overall, 753 studies were initially identified, of which 24 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) satisfied the eligibility criteria with a total of 2084 patients with a mean follow-up of 3.33 ± 13.4 weeks. Evaluated interventions included mechanical stimulation, topical therapy, shock wave therapy (SWT), laser and light-based devices, radiofrequency therapy, subcutaneous injectables, and ultrasound. SWT emerged as a standout intervention, demonstrating a consistent cellulite reduction score of 2.07 ± 0.39 across four studies. Radiofrequency therapy exhibited a statistically significant reduction of thigh circumference (- 2.09 cm, p &lt; 0.001) and subcutaneous tissue thickness (- 2.23 cm, p &lt; 0.001). Subcutaneous injectables, specifically collagenase Clostridium histolyticum-aaes, demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in the clinician-reported photonumeric cellulite severity scale (17.0%) and patient-reported photonumeric cellulite severity scale (25.7%) (p &lt; 0.001). The overall quality of the studies using the grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation approach was moderate. This is the first methodologically robust systematic review evaluating interventions for cellulite. SWT, radiofrequency therapy, and subcutaneous injectables have shown promising findings in cellulite treatment. The journal asks authors to assign a level of evidence to each article. For a complete description of Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, see the Table of Contents or the online Instructions for Authors at www.springer.com/00266 .</description><identifier>ISSN: 0364-216X</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1432-5241</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-5241</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00266-024-04365-8</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39547984</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><ispartof>Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2024-11</ispartof><rights>2024. Crown.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c184t-6fdde7ef54ad2d6c7d1bfce00a0cbf93e382374f1a71554b9b0968c9034618273</cites><orcidid>0009-0000-3246-7463</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39547984$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lim, Su Kwan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gultekin, Gozde</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Suresan, Srutti</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jacob, Anu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zou, Yutong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liyanage, Dinithi D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parekh, Jvalant N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mavilakandy, Akash K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vyas, Krishna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khajuria, Ankur</creatorcontrib><title>Comparative Analysis of Cellulite Treatment Modalities: A Systematic Review</title><title>Aesthetic plastic surgery</title><addtitle>Aesthetic Plast Surg</addtitle><description>Cellulite is a highly prevalent and aesthetically distressing skin condition. Whilst there are a variety of treatment modalities, none are definitively established. This systematic review aims to assess invasive and noninvasive treatment modalities for cellulite management. The review protocol was published and registered a priori (PROSPERO CRD42022359334). A comprehensive electronic search for relevant randomised controlled trials, (RCTs) was performed in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science databases. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using Cochrane's risk of bias tool, respectively. Overall, 753 studies were initially identified, of which 24 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) satisfied the eligibility criteria with a total of 2084 patients with a mean follow-up of 3.33 ± 13.4 weeks. Evaluated interventions included mechanical stimulation, topical therapy, shock wave therapy (SWT), laser and light-based devices, radiofrequency therapy, subcutaneous injectables, and ultrasound. SWT emerged as a standout intervention, demonstrating a consistent cellulite reduction score of 2.07 ± 0.39 across four studies. Radiofrequency therapy exhibited a statistically significant reduction of thigh circumference (- 2.09 cm, p &lt; 0.001) and subcutaneous tissue thickness (- 2.23 cm, p &lt; 0.001). Subcutaneous injectables, specifically collagenase Clostridium histolyticum-aaes, demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in the clinician-reported photonumeric cellulite severity scale (17.0%) and patient-reported photonumeric cellulite severity scale (25.7%) (p &lt; 0.001). The overall quality of the studies using the grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation approach was moderate. This is the first methodologically robust systematic review evaluating interventions for cellulite. SWT, radiofrequency therapy, and subcutaneous injectables have shown promising findings in cellulite treatment. The journal asks authors to assign a level of evidence to each article. For a complete description of Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, see the Table of Contents or the online Instructions for Authors at www.springer.com/00266 .</description><issn>0364-216X</issn><issn>1432-5241</issn><issn>1432-5241</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo9kEtLw0AUhQdRbK3-ARcySzej88o83JXgCyuCVnA3TCZ3IJI0NZNU-u-NVl1dOJzvcPkQOmX0glGqLxOlXClCuSRUCpURs4emTApOMi7ZPppSoSThTL1N0FFK75QyrrU8RBNhM6mtkVP0kLfN2ne-rzaA5ytfb1OVcBtxDnU91FUPeNmB7xtY9fixLf0YVZCu8By_bFMPzUgG_AybCj6P0UH0dYKT3ztDrzfXy_yOLJ5u7_P5ggRmZE9ULEvQEDPpS16qoEtWxACUehqKaAUIw4WWkXnNskwWtqBWmWCpkIoZrsUMne921137MUDqXVOlMP7rV9AOyQnGjdVWSD5W-a4aujalDqJbd1Xju61j1H1LdDuJbpTofiQ6M0Jnv_tD0UD5j_xZE1_OQm0S</recordid><startdate>20241115</startdate><enddate>20241115</enddate><creator>Lim, Su Kwan</creator><creator>Gultekin, Gozde</creator><creator>Suresan, Srutti</creator><creator>Jacob, Anu</creator><creator>Zou, Yutong</creator><creator>Liyanage, Dinithi D</creator><creator>Parekh, Jvalant N</creator><creator>Mavilakandy, Akash K</creator><creator>Vyas, Krishna</creator><creator>Khajuria, Ankur</creator><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3246-7463</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20241115</creationdate><title>Comparative Analysis of Cellulite Treatment Modalities: A Systematic Review</title><author>Lim, Su Kwan ; Gultekin, Gozde ; Suresan, Srutti ; Jacob, Anu ; Zou, Yutong ; Liyanage, Dinithi D ; Parekh, Jvalant N ; Mavilakandy, Akash K ; Vyas, Krishna ; Khajuria, Ankur</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c184t-6fdde7ef54ad2d6c7d1bfce00a0cbf93e382374f1a71554b9b0968c9034618273</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lim, Su Kwan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gultekin, Gozde</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Suresan, Srutti</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jacob, Anu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zou, Yutong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liyanage, Dinithi D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parekh, Jvalant N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mavilakandy, Akash K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vyas, Krishna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khajuria, Ankur</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Aesthetic plastic surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lim, Su Kwan</au><au>Gultekin, Gozde</au><au>Suresan, Srutti</au><au>Jacob, Anu</au><au>Zou, Yutong</au><au>Liyanage, Dinithi D</au><au>Parekh, Jvalant N</au><au>Mavilakandy, Akash K</au><au>Vyas, Krishna</au><au>Khajuria, Ankur</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparative Analysis of Cellulite Treatment Modalities: A Systematic Review</atitle><jtitle>Aesthetic plastic surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Aesthetic Plast Surg</addtitle><date>2024-11-15</date><risdate>2024</risdate><issn>0364-216X</issn><issn>1432-5241</issn><eissn>1432-5241</eissn><abstract>Cellulite is a highly prevalent and aesthetically distressing skin condition. Whilst there are a variety of treatment modalities, none are definitively established. This systematic review aims to assess invasive and noninvasive treatment modalities for cellulite management. The review protocol was published and registered a priori (PROSPERO CRD42022359334). A comprehensive electronic search for relevant randomised controlled trials, (RCTs) was performed in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science databases. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using Cochrane's risk of bias tool, respectively. Overall, 753 studies were initially identified, of which 24 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) satisfied the eligibility criteria with a total of 2084 patients with a mean follow-up of 3.33 ± 13.4 weeks. Evaluated interventions included mechanical stimulation, topical therapy, shock wave therapy (SWT), laser and light-based devices, radiofrequency therapy, subcutaneous injectables, and ultrasound. SWT emerged as a standout intervention, demonstrating a consistent cellulite reduction score of 2.07 ± 0.39 across four studies. Radiofrequency therapy exhibited a statistically significant reduction of thigh circumference (- 2.09 cm, p &lt; 0.001) and subcutaneous tissue thickness (- 2.23 cm, p &lt; 0.001). Subcutaneous injectables, specifically collagenase Clostridium histolyticum-aaes, demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in the clinician-reported photonumeric cellulite severity scale (17.0%) and patient-reported photonumeric cellulite severity scale (25.7%) (p &lt; 0.001). The overall quality of the studies using the grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation approach was moderate. This is the first methodologically robust systematic review evaluating interventions for cellulite. SWT, radiofrequency therapy, and subcutaneous injectables have shown promising findings in cellulite treatment. The journal asks authors to assign a level of evidence to each article. For a complete description of Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, see the Table of Contents or the online Instructions for Authors at www.springer.com/00266 .</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>39547984</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00266-024-04365-8</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3246-7463</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0364-216X
ispartof Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2024-11
issn 0364-216X
1432-5241
1432-5241
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3128979342
source Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals
title Comparative Analysis of Cellulite Treatment Modalities: A Systematic Review
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-13T23%3A54%3A43IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparative%20Analysis%20of%20Cellulite%20Treatment%20Modalities:%20A%20Systematic%20Review&rft.jtitle=Aesthetic%20plastic%20surgery&rft.au=Lim,%20Su%20Kwan&rft.date=2024-11-15&rft.issn=0364-216X&rft.eissn=1432-5241&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00266-024-04365-8&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3128979342%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3128979342&rft_id=info:pmid/39547984&rfr_iscdi=true