Non-invasive Body Contouring alternatives to Liposculpture


While patients and cosmetic doctors enthusiastically embrace non-invasive technologies as alternatives to liposculpture, a recent review article seems to suggest that, to date, outcomes from these technologies are either only fair to modest or simply disappointing. 
Focused ultrasound and cryolysis seem to hold the most promise thus far but patient expectations should be realistic before committing to rather expensive treatments that may come to little or no improvement. In my view Tumescent Liposculpture remains the gold standard in the quest for a reliable and durable outcome. Additionally there would appear to be very little if any difference in costs. QnCategoryID=130&QnArticleID=262

In Summary:

ULTRASOUND CAVITATION aims to induce fatty tissue disruption. However, the frequencies associated with cavitation are difficult to focus with precision. There are several ultrasonic cavitation devices on the market, but there appears to be little evidence that they produce a true cavitation effect resulting in cell lysis with lasting effects.
The permanence of RF as a body-contouring treatment has not been well proven and newer technology platforms have taken the spotlight.

Treatments are generally well tolerated but are limited to areas that can be lifted into the suction head of the device. Each application takes about 1 hour, and an average of 25% reduction in thickness of the adipose layer has been reported. Each area is treated once, though re-treatment is possible after a period of months if desired.

Though this may be associated with greater discomfort during these procedures, focusing may be more precise than it is with frequencies used for cavitation however the effects are mostly modest.

There is skepticism as to the clinical mechanism of action and long-term results. No histological studies of tissue treated in vivo have been presented despite the marketing claims of efficacy.