User login
After a single treatment, it provided a roughly 1.16 point reduction in the five-point Cellulite Severity Scale at 12 weeks, which corresponds to a roughly 32.5% reduction in cellulite.
“In cellulite, we know that the septa within the fat – those fibrous bands that pull down the skin and tether – lead to the traditional look of cellulite dimples and ridges,” lead study author Elizabeth Tanzi, MD, said during a late-breaking abstract session at the virtual annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology. A rapid acoustic pulse (RAP) device being developed by Soliton emits rapid acoustic pulses and shock waves at 50 Hz that are transmitted through the skin. The pulses “rupture and shear the fibrotic septa, which causes release of the septa and smoothing of the skin dimples,” explained Dr. Tanzi, director of Capital Laser & Skin Care in Chevy Chase, Md.
She added that the repetition rate of the RAP device makes it stand out from other technologies currently on the market for cellulite treatment. “The repetition rate and very short rise times provide microscopic mechanical destruction to the targeted cellular level structures and the vacuoles,” Dr. Tanzi said. “The high peak pressure and fast repetition rate exploit the viscoelastic nature of the tissue. It’s the rapid rate at which the energy is being delivered, as well as the very short times that energy is being delivered, that makes the technology an entirely different device-tissue interaction.”
The physical effects observed occur in the extracellular matrix and in the destruction of fibrous septa. “That’s the acoustic subcision,” she continued. “But also, there’s no cavitation and there are nonthermal physical effects. There is some investigational research going into what biologic effects those shock waves have on the rest of the tissue, looking into neocollagenesis, potential angiogenesis, potential lymphangiogenesis, as well as inflammation inhibition.”
In a prospective pivotal clinical trial conducted at four sites, Dr. Tanzi and her colleagues evaluated the safety and effectiveness of the RAP device in 62 female patients who were treated with a single, rapid acoustic pulse treatment comprised of 1-2 minutes on each identified dimple or large ridge of cellulite. This amounted to a 19- to 33-minute treatment session for each patient. No anesthesia was required, and photographs were taken on all sites with QuantifiCare medical imaging software.
“It’s completely noninvasive and it’s truly an incisionless treatment,” Dr. Tanzi said of the procedure. “The skin’s never punctured. There’s physician oversight, but it is highly delegatable, and there is no recovery time for the patient.”
Following treatment, adverse effects and tolerability were reported, and safety and efficacy were assessed at 12 weeks. Efficacy was determined by photographic assessment by three blinded independent physicians who used a validated, simplified version of the Cellulite Severity Scale (CSS), a 0-5 scale based on the number of cellulite depressions, as well as the average depth of those depressions.
The mean age of patients was 43 years, 92% were white, and their mean body mass index was 24.5 kg/m2. The average time of treatment was 28 minutes. Based on the CSS scores, the researchers found that 87% of the study subjects had some improvement of their cellulite after a single RAP treatment. “If you break the data down further, half of patients had at least a 30% reduction of their CSS, and almost one-quarter had a 50% improvement of their CSS,” Dr. Tanzi said. “Overall, we saw a reduction of a 1.16 level on that six-point scale, which translates roughly into 32.5% reduction of the look of their cellulite from the baseline score.”
In addition, 84% of the time, the blinded assessors were able to correctly identify pre- and posttreatment unlabeled photos that they were presented at the 3-month mark. Those same blinded assessors graded about 86% of the treated cellulite areas as appearing either improved, much improved, or very much improved on the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS).
“We found a very favorable side-effect profile, although 95% of patients had some redness to their skin,” Dr. Tanzi added. “They had some erythema and folliculitis, but it was transient and very mild. In addition, 98% of patients said that the procedure was tolerable.”
As for pain, on a 0-10 scale, with 10 being the worst, subjects rated their pain level at 2.4 during the treatment and 0.3 immediately afterward. On subject satisfaction surveys, 92% of the patient said that they “agree” or “strongly agree” that their cellulite appeared improved.
“Patients with moderate cellulite seem to respond [to this treatment], too,” Dr. Tanzi said. “I don’t think there’s a ceiling or a floor to which we have to pigeonhole patients into potentially treating with this device. I think the key is [targeting] cellulite and not necessarily skin laxity.”
She emphasized that much remains to be known about the RAP device for treating cellulite. “What happens if we do multiple treatments to the tissue?” she asked. “Also, we need to further investigate what’s happening in the tissue, because not only does it seem like we’re getting a cleaving of the fibrous septa, but what is happening to the fibroblasts? What’s really happening in the tissue on a molecular level when those rapid acoustic pulses are going through the skin? There’s a lot of unanswered questions, but this is exciting technology.”
According to a news release from Soliton, the company is further reviewing and analyzing these results for inclusion in a marketing application to the Food and Drug Administration.
Soliton sponsored the trial. Dr. Tanzi disclosed that she is either a consultant for or is a member of the scientific advisory board for Allergan/Coolsculpting, Beiersdorf, Cutera, Merz/Ulthera, Pulse Biosciences, Sciton, Soliton, Solta, and Syneron/Candela.
After a single treatment, it provided a roughly 1.16 point reduction in the five-point Cellulite Severity Scale at 12 weeks, which corresponds to a roughly 32.5% reduction in cellulite.
“In cellulite, we know that the septa within the fat – those fibrous bands that pull down the skin and tether – lead to the traditional look of cellulite dimples and ridges,” lead study author Elizabeth Tanzi, MD, said during a late-breaking abstract session at the virtual annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology. A rapid acoustic pulse (RAP) device being developed by Soliton emits rapid acoustic pulses and shock waves at 50 Hz that are transmitted through the skin. The pulses “rupture and shear the fibrotic septa, which causes release of the septa and smoothing of the skin dimples,” explained Dr. Tanzi, director of Capital Laser & Skin Care in Chevy Chase, Md.
She added that the repetition rate of the RAP device makes it stand out from other technologies currently on the market for cellulite treatment. “The repetition rate and very short rise times provide microscopic mechanical destruction to the targeted cellular level structures and the vacuoles,” Dr. Tanzi said. “The high peak pressure and fast repetition rate exploit the viscoelastic nature of the tissue. It’s the rapid rate at which the energy is being delivered, as well as the very short times that energy is being delivered, that makes the technology an entirely different device-tissue interaction.”
The physical effects observed occur in the extracellular matrix and in the destruction of fibrous septa. “That’s the acoustic subcision,” she continued. “But also, there’s no cavitation and there are nonthermal physical effects. There is some investigational research going into what biologic effects those shock waves have on the rest of the tissue, looking into neocollagenesis, potential angiogenesis, potential lymphangiogenesis, as well as inflammation inhibition.”
In a prospective pivotal clinical trial conducted at four sites, Dr. Tanzi and her colleagues evaluated the safety and effectiveness of the RAP device in 62 female patients who were treated with a single, rapid acoustic pulse treatment comprised of 1-2 minutes on each identified dimple or large ridge of cellulite. This amounted to a 19- to 33-minute treatment session for each patient. No anesthesia was required, and photographs were taken on all sites with QuantifiCare medical imaging software.
“It’s completely noninvasive and it’s truly an incisionless treatment,” Dr. Tanzi said of the procedure. “The skin’s never punctured. There’s physician oversight, but it is highly delegatable, and there is no recovery time for the patient.”
Following treatment, adverse effects and tolerability were reported, and safety and efficacy were assessed at 12 weeks. Efficacy was determined by photographic assessment by three blinded independent physicians who used a validated, simplified version of the Cellulite Severity Scale (CSS), a 0-5 scale based on the number of cellulite depressions, as well as the average depth of those depressions.
The mean age of patients was 43 years, 92% were white, and their mean body mass index was 24.5 kg/m2. The average time of treatment was 28 minutes. Based on the CSS scores, the researchers found that 87% of the study subjects had some improvement of their cellulite after a single RAP treatment. “If you break the data down further, half of patients had at least a 30% reduction of their CSS, and almost one-quarter had a 50% improvement of their CSS,” Dr. Tanzi said. “Overall, we saw a reduction of a 1.16 level on that six-point scale, which translates roughly into 32.5% reduction of the look of their cellulite from the baseline score.”
In addition, 84% of the time, the blinded assessors were able to correctly identify pre- and posttreatment unlabeled photos that they were presented at the 3-month mark. Those same blinded assessors graded about 86% of the treated cellulite areas as appearing either improved, much improved, or very much improved on the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS).
“We found a very favorable side-effect profile, although 95% of patients had some redness to their skin,” Dr. Tanzi added. “They had some erythema and folliculitis, but it was transient and very mild. In addition, 98% of patients said that the procedure was tolerable.”
As for pain, on a 0-10 scale, with 10 being the worst, subjects rated their pain level at 2.4 during the treatment and 0.3 immediately afterward. On subject satisfaction surveys, 92% of the patient said that they “agree” or “strongly agree” that their cellulite appeared improved.
“Patients with moderate cellulite seem to respond [to this treatment], too,” Dr. Tanzi said. “I don’t think there’s a ceiling or a floor to which we have to pigeonhole patients into potentially treating with this device. I think the key is [targeting] cellulite and not necessarily skin laxity.”
She emphasized that much remains to be known about the RAP device for treating cellulite. “What happens if we do multiple treatments to the tissue?” she asked. “Also, we need to further investigate what’s happening in the tissue, because not only does it seem like we’re getting a cleaving of the fibrous septa, but what is happening to the fibroblasts? What’s really happening in the tissue on a molecular level when those rapid acoustic pulses are going through the skin? There’s a lot of unanswered questions, but this is exciting technology.”
According to a news release from Soliton, the company is further reviewing and analyzing these results for inclusion in a marketing application to the Food and Drug Administration.
Soliton sponsored the trial. Dr. Tanzi disclosed that she is either a consultant for or is a member of the scientific advisory board for Allergan/Coolsculpting, Beiersdorf, Cutera, Merz/Ulthera, Pulse Biosciences, Sciton, Soliton, Solta, and Syneron/Candela.
After a single treatment, it provided a roughly 1.16 point reduction in the five-point Cellulite Severity Scale at 12 weeks, which corresponds to a roughly 32.5% reduction in cellulite.
“In cellulite, we know that the septa within the fat – those fibrous bands that pull down the skin and tether – lead to the traditional look of cellulite dimples and ridges,” lead study author Elizabeth Tanzi, MD, said during a late-breaking abstract session at the virtual annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology. A rapid acoustic pulse (RAP) device being developed by Soliton emits rapid acoustic pulses and shock waves at 50 Hz that are transmitted through the skin. The pulses “rupture and shear the fibrotic septa, which causes release of the septa and smoothing of the skin dimples,” explained Dr. Tanzi, director of Capital Laser & Skin Care in Chevy Chase, Md.
She added that the repetition rate of the RAP device makes it stand out from other technologies currently on the market for cellulite treatment. “The repetition rate and very short rise times provide microscopic mechanical destruction to the targeted cellular level structures and the vacuoles,” Dr. Tanzi said. “The high peak pressure and fast repetition rate exploit the viscoelastic nature of the tissue. It’s the rapid rate at which the energy is being delivered, as well as the very short times that energy is being delivered, that makes the technology an entirely different device-tissue interaction.”
The physical effects observed occur in the extracellular matrix and in the destruction of fibrous septa. “That’s the acoustic subcision,” she continued. “But also, there’s no cavitation and there are nonthermal physical effects. There is some investigational research going into what biologic effects those shock waves have on the rest of the tissue, looking into neocollagenesis, potential angiogenesis, potential lymphangiogenesis, as well as inflammation inhibition.”
In a prospective pivotal clinical trial conducted at four sites, Dr. Tanzi and her colleagues evaluated the safety and effectiveness of the RAP device in 62 female patients who were treated with a single, rapid acoustic pulse treatment comprised of 1-2 minutes on each identified dimple or large ridge of cellulite. This amounted to a 19- to 33-minute treatment session for each patient. No anesthesia was required, and photographs were taken on all sites with QuantifiCare medical imaging software.
“It’s completely noninvasive and it’s truly an incisionless treatment,” Dr. Tanzi said of the procedure. “The skin’s never punctured. There’s physician oversight, but it is highly delegatable, and there is no recovery time for the patient.”
Following treatment, adverse effects and tolerability were reported, and safety and efficacy were assessed at 12 weeks. Efficacy was determined by photographic assessment by three blinded independent physicians who used a validated, simplified version of the Cellulite Severity Scale (CSS), a 0-5 scale based on the number of cellulite depressions, as well as the average depth of those depressions.
The mean age of patients was 43 years, 92% were white, and their mean body mass index was 24.5 kg/m2. The average time of treatment was 28 minutes. Based on the CSS scores, the researchers found that 87% of the study subjects had some improvement of their cellulite after a single RAP treatment. “If you break the data down further, half of patients had at least a 30% reduction of their CSS, and almost one-quarter had a 50% improvement of their CSS,” Dr. Tanzi said. “Overall, we saw a reduction of a 1.16 level on that six-point scale, which translates roughly into 32.5% reduction of the look of their cellulite from the baseline score.”
In addition, 84% of the time, the blinded assessors were able to correctly identify pre- and posttreatment unlabeled photos that they were presented at the 3-month mark. Those same blinded assessors graded about 86% of the treated cellulite areas as appearing either improved, much improved, or very much improved on the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS).
“We found a very favorable side-effect profile, although 95% of patients had some redness to their skin,” Dr. Tanzi added. “They had some erythema and folliculitis, but it was transient and very mild. In addition, 98% of patients said that the procedure was tolerable.”
As for pain, on a 0-10 scale, with 10 being the worst, subjects rated their pain level at 2.4 during the treatment and 0.3 immediately afterward. On subject satisfaction surveys, 92% of the patient said that they “agree” or “strongly agree” that their cellulite appeared improved.
“Patients with moderate cellulite seem to respond [to this treatment], too,” Dr. Tanzi said. “I don’t think there’s a ceiling or a floor to which we have to pigeonhole patients into potentially treating with this device. I think the key is [targeting] cellulite and not necessarily skin laxity.”
She emphasized that much remains to be known about the RAP device for treating cellulite. “What happens if we do multiple treatments to the tissue?” she asked. “Also, we need to further investigate what’s happening in the tissue, because not only does it seem like we’re getting a cleaving of the fibrous septa, but what is happening to the fibroblasts? What’s really happening in the tissue on a molecular level when those rapid acoustic pulses are going through the skin? There’s a lot of unanswered questions, but this is exciting technology.”
According to a news release from Soliton, the company is further reviewing and analyzing these results for inclusion in a marketing application to the Food and Drug Administration.
Soliton sponsored the trial. Dr. Tanzi disclosed that she is either a consultant for or is a member of the scientific advisory board for Allergan/Coolsculpting, Beiersdorf, Cutera, Merz/Ulthera, Pulse Biosciences, Sciton, Soliton, Solta, and Syneron/Candela.
FROM AAD 20