Sabrina G Fabi1, Mitchel P Goldman, Daniel C Mills, W Philip Werschler, Jeremy B Green, Joely Kaufman, Robert A Weiss, Carl S Hornfeldt. 1. *Dermatology Cosmetic Laser Medical Associates of La Jolla, San Diego, California; †Aesthetic Plastic Surgical Institute, Laguna Beach, California; ‡Premier Clinical Research, Spokane, Washington; §Skin Associates of South Florida, Coral Gables, Florida; ‖Maryland Laser Skin and Vein Institute, Hunt Valley, Maryland; ¶Apothekon Inc., Woodbury, Minnesota.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A microfocused ultrasound system with visualization (MFU-V) is currently indicated for use as a noninvasive dermatological aesthetic treatment to lift the eyebrows, lax submental and neck tissue, and improve lines and wrinkles of the décolleté. OBJECTIVE: To determine the existence of any safety signals when combining MFU-V with botulinum toxin-A and/or semipermanent and temporary dermal fillers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed using subjects who received aesthetic treatments including incobotulinumtoxinA injection, cohesive polydensified matrix hyaluronic acid (CPM HA) dermal fillers, and calcium hydroxylapatite (CaHA) dermal fillers within 6 months of treatment with MFU-V in the same or different anatomic areas. RESULTS: All subjects (N = 101; 96 female; 25-70 year old) received MFU-V, 18% received incobotulinumtoxinA injections, and 81% were treated with CPM HA and/or CaHA fillers. Seven adverse events (7%) were reported: bruising/purpura (n = 4), swelling (n = 1), paresthesia (n = 1), and herpes simplex virus (HSV) outbreak (n = 1). Only the HSV outbreak was considered to be related to combined treatments. CONCLUSION: Although limited by relatively few subjects, the results of the present study suggest that the safety profile of MFU-V combined with other aesthetic products is consistent with the safety profiles of the individual treatments.
BACKGROUND: A microfocused ultrasound system with visualization (MFU-V) is currently indicated for use as a noninvasive dermatological aesthetic treatment to lift the eyebrows, lax submental and neck tissue, and improve lines and wrinkles of the décolleté. OBJECTIVE: To determine the existence of any safety signals when combining MFU-V with botulinum toxin-A and/or semipermanent and temporary dermal fillers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed using subjects who received aesthetic treatments including incobotulinumtoxinA injection, cohesive polydensified matrix hyaluronic acid (CPM HA) dermal fillers, and calcium hydroxylapatite (CaHA) dermal fillers within 6 months of treatment with MFU-V in the same or different anatomic areas. RESULTS: All subjects (N = 101; 96 female; 25-70 year old) received MFU-V, 18% received incobotulinumtoxinA injections, and 81% were treated with CPM HA and/or CaHA fillers. Seven adverse events (7%) were reported: bruising/purpura (n = 4), swelling (n = 1), paresthesia (n = 1), and herpes simplex virus (HSV) outbreak (n = 1). Only the HSV outbreak was considered to be related to combined treatments. CONCLUSION: Although limited by relatively few subjects, the results of the present study suggest that the safety profile of MFU-V combined with other aesthetic products is consistent with the safety profiles of the individual treatments.
Authors: Hugues Cartier; Per Hedén; Henry Delmar; Per Bergentz; Cecilia Skoglund; Carolina Edwartz; Maria Norberg; Philippe Kestemont Journal: Dermatol Surg Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 2.914