| Literature DB >> 35645660 |
Esraa H Rostom1,2, Amr B Salama1,3.
Abstract
Introduction: Cellulite is one of the complications post liposuction. Cellulite causes changes in the lymphatic system. Manual lymphatic drainage is utilized as an effective treatment for enhancing cellulite. Aim: To compare between Vodder Manual Lymphatic Drainage (MLD) Technique and Casley-Smith MLD Technique for cellulite after liposuction. Material and methods: Thirty female patients with cellulite grade 3 after thigh liposuction participated in the study, and they were randomly divided into two equal groups: Group (A) that received Vodder MLD Technique and Bandage and Group (B) that received Casley-Smith MLD Technique and Bandage. The duration of the intervention was 8 weeks per participant, and each participant received 3 sessions per week.Entities:
Keywords: Casley-Smith manual lymphatic drainage; Vodder Manual lymphatic drainage; cellulite; thigh liposuction
Year: 2021 PMID: 35645660 PMCID: PMC9131957 DOI: 10.5114/ada.2021.106042
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Postepy Dermatol Alergol ISSN: 1642-395X Impact factor: 1.664
Comparison of subject characteristics between group A and B
| Variable | MD | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group A | Group B | ||||
| Age [years] | 40.86 ±2.79 | 39.73 ±3.23 | 1.13 | 1.02 | 0.31 |
| Maximum–minimum | 45–36 | 45–35 | |||
x – Mean, SD – standard deviation, MD – mean difference, p-value – probability value.
Comparison of subject characteristics between group A and B
| Cellulite Severity Scale score | Group A Frequency | Group B Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| Pre treatment: | ||
| Mild (1–5) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Moderate (6–10) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Severe (11–15) | 15 (100%) | 15 (100%) |
| Post treatment: | ||
| Mild (1–5) | 13 (86.7%) | 12 (80%) |
| Moderate (6–10) | 2 (13.3%) | 3 (20%) |
| Severe (11–15) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
Median values of Cellulite Severity Scale score for group A and B pre- and post-treatment
| Cellulite Severity Scale score | Group AMedian (IQR) | Group BMedian (IQR) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre treatment | 12 (13.11) | 12 (13.11) | 108.5 | 0.86 |
| Post treatment | 4 (5.3) | 4 (5.3) | 110 | 0.91 |
| 3.47 | 3.44 | |||
IQR – inter quartile range, U-value – Mann-Whitney test value, Z-value – Wilcoxon signed ranks test value, p-value – level of significance.
Figure 1Participants’ flowchart