Cryolipolysis and Subcision for Treatment of Cellulite

Cellulite Clinical Trial

Official title:

Comparison of the Efficacy Between Cryolipolysis and Subcision for Treatment of Cellulite: A Prospective Randomized Control Trial.

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT01209767
• Other study ID #: STU34401
• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: October 2010
• Est. completion date: September 2011

Study information

• Verified date: December 2021
• Source: Northwestern University
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

This study intended to investigate and compare the changes that may occur in response to cryolipolysis (localized cool exposure) and subcision (surgical technique) on cellulite. The cryolipolysis cooling device used is FDA approved for skin cooling, but still investigational in the treatment of cellulite. It has previously been used for fat reduction on love handles or back fat. During cryolipolysis, the system drew fat tissue into an applicator then exposes the extracted fat tissue to cold temperatures. The cold exposure caused fat cells to die, with the goal to decrease the raised areas of cellulite. Subcision is a process used to treat scars left behind by acne or other skin diseases and has been noted to improve moderate to severe cellulite. Subcision is a simple surgical procedure that is performed by inserting a specially designed needle under the skin after local numbing medication is injected. The needle is moved in a repetitive motion parallel to the skin to separate the surface tissue from the deeper scar tissue with the goal to improve the dimpling caused by these tissues sticking together. This study was a pilot study designed to determine feasibility of these procedures.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 22
• Est. completion date: September 2011
• Est. primary completion date: September 2011
• Accepts healthy volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years to 60 Years

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Healthy female patients 18-60 years of age with more than one evident depressed lesion of cellulite on the upper thighs and/or buttocks.
• All subjects must have the affected areas that show the mattress phenomenon spontaneously when standing or while both lying and standing (Stage 2 or 3 of Nurnberger-Muller grading scale of cellulite7).
• Subjects who are willing and have the ability to understand and provide informed consent for participation in the study and are able to communicate with the investigator.

Exclusion Criteria:

• Pregnant or lactating
• Subjects who are unable to understand the protocol or to give informed consent.
• Subjects currently under treatment with an antiplatelet or anticoagulant for any medical problem or patients who have coagulation disorder.
• Subjects who have a known history of cold-induced disease such as cryoglobulinemia, paroxysmal cold hemoglobinuria, or cold urticaria.
• Subjects who have active skin disease or skin infection in treatment area.
• Subjects who are allergic to lidocaine or prilocaine.
• Subjects who are allergic to both cephalexin (and penicillin) AND levofloxacin (or another quinolone antibiotic).
• Subjects who have history of abnormal scarring.

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Cellulite

Intervention

Device:
• cryolipolysis
During cryolipolysis, the system drew fat tissue into an applicator then exposed the extracted fat tissue to cold temperatures. The cold exposure caused fat cells to die, with the goal to decrease the raised areas of cellulite

Procedure:
• Subcision
Subcision was performed by inserting a specially designed needle under the skin after local numbing medication is injected. The needle is moved in a repetitive motion parallel to the skin to separate the surface tissue from the deeper scar tissue with the goal to improve the dimpling caused by these tissues sticking together.

Other:
• Control

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
United States	Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Department of Dermatology	Chicago	Illinois

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Northwestern University

Country where clinical trial is conducted

United States, 

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Blinded Rating of the Treatment Area (Cryolipolysis vs. Subcision) With the Best Cosmetic Appearance.	Two dermatologists blindly evaluated and compared the treated and control areas of each side at the final follow up visit (week 12). They rated the area with the best cosmetic appearance and reported the percentages of participants for whom "Cryolipolysis" or "Subcision" resulted in the "best cosmetic appearance". It was possible for raters to determine that neither treatment outperformed the other, thereby rating the control arm better.	12 weeks