| Literature DB >> 32792875 |
Łukasz Paluch1, Piotr Pietruski2, Bartłomiej Kwiek3,4, Bartłomiej Noszczyk2, Marcin Ambroziak2,3.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Our study goal was verification of shear-wave elastography (SWE) as an assessment tool enabling quantitative analysis of facial fat tissue elasticity, using the example of the deep medial cheek fat compartment (DMCFC), due to its major role in pseudoptosis etiology. AIM: Furthermore, we determined the age-specific reference values for DMCFC elasticity and analyzed its correlation with body mass index (BMI) and DMCFC thickness.Entities:
Keywords: deep medial fat pad; elasticity; elastography; strain
Year: 2018 PMID: 32792875 PMCID: PMC7394156 DOI: 10.5114/ada.2018.79778
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Postepy Dermatol Alergol ISSN: 1642-395X Impact factor: 1.837
Figure 1Superficial (blue color) and deep (red color) fat compartments crucial for midface region rejuvenation. A – Superficial lateral cheek fat compartment, B – superficial middle cheek fat compartment, C – superficial nasolabial fat compartment, D – deep medial cheek fat compartment
Figure 2Representative elastographic image of DMCFC
Basic characteristics of study participants and descriptive statistics for DMCFC thickness and strain
| Parameter | Mean | SD | Median | Min. | Max. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age [years] | 45.9 | 14.2 | 49 | 18 | 67 |
| BMI [kg/m2] | 24.76 | 3.22 | 24.68 | 18.59 | 33.98 |
| DMCFC thickness [mm] | 2.31 | 0.74 | 2.39 | 1.00 | 5.50 |
| DMCFC strain [kPa] | 11.2 | 6.9 | 7.9 | 4.7 | 35.7 |
Results of multiple linear regression analysis, documenting the effects of age, BMI and DMCFC thickness on DMCFC elasticity
| Predictor | DMC (R2 = 0.754) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| β | SE | P-value | |
| Age [years] | –0.837 | 0.040 | < 0.001 |
| BMI [kg/m2] | –0.050 | 0.039 | 0.197 |
| DMCFC thickness [mm] | –0.058 | 0.039 | 0.144 |
Comparison of DMCFC elasticity (in kPa) in participants from various age categories
| Age group [years] | Mean Strain | SD | Median | Min. | Max. | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| < 40 years | 40–49 years | 50–59 years | ≥ 60 years | |||||||
| < 40 | 18 | 22.4 | 5.8 | 23.2 | 13.0 | 35.7 | – | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| 40–49 | 28 | 11.6 | 3.4 | 11.0 | 6.0 | 18.3 | < 0.001 | – | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| 50–59 | 29 | 6.4 | 0.9 | 6.3 | 4.7 | 8.7 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | – | 0.679 |
| ≥ 60 | 14 | 5.8 | 0.6 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 7.0 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.679 | – |
< 40 years vs. 40–49 years.
Figure 3ROC curves illustrating the accuracy of age-specific cut-off values for DMCFC elasticity: (A) > 18.333 KPa for women < 40 years, (B) < 8 KPa for women ≥ 50 years
Proposed reference ranges for DMCFC elasticity
| Age group [years] | Reference value | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | AUC (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ± 2 SD [kPa] | ROC [kPa] | ||||||
| < 40 | 11–34 | > 18 | 0.778 | 0.993 | 0.966 | 0.946 | 0.979 (0.963–0.996) |
| 40–49 | 5–18 | 8–19 | – | – | – | – | – |
| > 50 | 4–8 | < 8 | 0.965 | 0.913 | 0.912 | 0.966 | 0.970 (0.947–0.993) |