Feasibility Study of Electromagnetic Muscle Stimulation and Cryolipolysis for Abdominal Contouring

• Published in: Dermatologic surgery Vol. 46 Suppl 1; p. S14
• Main Authors: Kilmer, Suzanne L, Cox, Sue Ellen, Zelickson, Brian D, Bachelor, Eric P, Gamio, Sylvia, Ostrowski, Rafael, Pham, Linda D, Stevens, W Grant
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.10.2020
• Subjects: Abdominal Muscles - radiation effects; Adult; Aged; Combined Modality Therapy - methods; Cryosurgery - adverse effects; Cryosurgery - methods; Feasibility Studies; Female; Humans; Lipoabdominoplasty - adverse effects; Lipoabdominoplasty - methods; Magnetic Field Therapy - adverse effects; Magnetic Field Therapy - methods; Male; Middle Aged; Patient Satisfaction; Prospective Studies; Subcutaneous Fat, Abdominal - surgery; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
• ISSN: 1524-4725
• DOI: 10.1097/DSS.0000000000002420

In addition to reducing subcutaneous fat for body contouring, some patients are interested in toning the underlying muscle layer. This feasibility study evaluated the safety and efficacy of electromagnetic muscle stimulation (EMMS) alone, cryolipolysis alone, and cryolipolysis with EMMS for noninvasive contouring of abdomen. Abdomens of 50 subjects were treated in a study with 3 cohorts: EMMS alone, Cryolipolysis alone, and Cryolipolysis + EMMS in combination. Electromagnetic muscle stimulation treatments were delivered in 4 sessions over 2 weeks. Cryolipolysis treatments were delivered in one session. Combination treatments consisted of one cryolipolysis and 4 EMMS visits. Efficacy was assessed by independent physician Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS), circumferential measurement, Subject GAIS (SGAIS), and Body Satisfaction Questionnaire (BSQ). Safety was demonstrated for all study cohorts with no device- or procedure-related adverse events. Independent photo review showed greatest mean GAIS score for the Cryolipolysis + EMMS cohort followed by Cryolipolysis only, then EMMS only cohort. BSQ showed greatest average score increase for Cryolipolysis + EMMS cohort followed by Cryolipolysis only cohort, then EMMS only cohort. Mean circumferential reduction measurements were greatest for Cryolipolysis + EMMS cohort followed by Cryolipolysis only, and then EMMS only cohort. The mean SGAIS improvement score was equal for the Cryolipolysis only and Cryolipolysis + EMMS cohorts, followed by the EMMS only cohort. A multimodal approach using cryolipolysis and EMMS was safe and demonstrated enhanced body contouring efficacy for this feasibility study.