| Literature DB >> 36183506 |
Rafaella Rêgo Maia1, Ayane Cristine Sarmento1, Rodrigo Marcel Valentim da Silva2, Eneida de Morais Carreiro3, Stephany Luanna Queiroga Farias4, Ciro Dantas Soares5, Patrícia Froes Meyer3, Ana Katherine Gonçalves6.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The authors aimed to evaluate clinical and histological changes induced by Fractional Radiofrequency (FRF) and microneedling in vulvar tissue.Entities:
Keywords: Flaccidity; Menopause; Microneedling; Radiofrequency
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36183506 PMCID: PMC9529663 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinsp.2022.100117
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clinics (Sao Paulo) ISSN: 1807-5932 Impact factor: 2.898
Characteristics of the study populations and results of the EQ-5D and the IMBK.
| G1 | G2 | |
|---|---|---|
| 15 | 15 | |
| 55.3 ± 4.2 | 54.3 ± 3.8 | |
| 2.20 ± 1.08 | 2.47 ± 1.5 | |
| 2.07 ± 0.88 | 1.60 ± 0.73 | |
| White | 9 (60%) | 9 (60%) |
| Mixed race | 6 (40%) | 5 (33.3%) |
| Black | 0 (0%) | 1 (6.6%) |
| Married | 10 (66,6%) | 6 (40%) |
| Divorced | 4 (26,6%) | 4 (26.6%) |
| Widow | 1 (6,6%) | 5 (33.3%) |
| EQ-5D ‒ Pre-treatment | 20.8 ± 2.7 | 20.4 ± 2.6 |
| EQ-5D ‒ 60 days post-treatment | 23.0 ± 1.7 | 21.8 ± 2.2 |
| p-value | ||
| General health level ‒ pre-treatment | 77.0 ± 15.0 | 78.6 ± 15.9 |
| General health level ‒ post-treatment | 71.6 ± 17.4 | 83,0 ± 9.9 |
| p-value | ||
| IMBK ‒ Pre-treatment | 24.8 ± 7.8 | 27.7 ± 9.1 |
| IMBK ‒ 60 days post-treatment | 22.4 ± 7.0 | 24.7 ± 7.8 |
| p-value |
EQ-5D, EuroQol Five-Dimensional; IMBK, Blatt and Kupperman Menopausal Index; SD, Standard Deviation.
Significant results.
Fig. 1Mean Vaginal Laxity Questionnaire (VLQ) scores from the pretreatment assessment, after 30 days’ post-treatment, and then after 60 days’ post-treatment: (A) G1 fractional radiofrequency; (B) G2 Microneedling. a Significant results at p≤0.05 for the comparison between the pre-treatment and after 2nd session at the 60-day mark.
Fig. 2Example of a participant from the fractionated radiofrequency group: (A) initial assessment; (B) evaluation after 30 days; (C) evaluation after 60 days.
Fig. 3Example of a participant from the microneedling group: (A) initial evaluation; (B) evaluation after 30 days; (C) evaluation after 60 days.
Fig. 4Results of the global aesthetic improvement scale: (A) G1 before undertaking an analysis of the photos; (B) G1 after analyzing the photos; (C) G2 before undertaking an analysis of the photos; (D) G2 after analyzing the photos.
Fig. 5Morphological aspects of the skin treated with radiofrequency and Microneedling.
Fig. 6Immunohistochemical analyses of radiofrequency of the samples treated with radiofrequency and microneedling.