Search

Background: The visible signs of photodamage can be improved by intense pulsed light (IPL). Active ingredients in cosmeceuticals also have effects on skin quality and pigmentation, and can camouflage post-treatment side effects. Combination therapies utilizing different treatment modalities have been shown to optimize clinical outcomes for skin rejuvenation and patient satisfaction., Aim: To evaluate the efficacy of a combination of IPL with a daily topical skincare and sunscreen regimen for the treatment of facial photodamage and for the improvement of IPL treatment tolerability., Patients/methods: Twenty female subjects with moderate-to-severe facial photodamage, with past history of IPL treatments, received one IPL treatment followed by the use of the topical skincare regimen for 8 weeks. An investigator assessed facial photodamage and hyperpigmentation at baseline, week 4, and week 8, and postprocedure erythema. Subject questionnaires were also administered at each visit., Results: Compared to baseline, there was a significant improvement in photodamage and hyperpigmentation of bare facial skin. The application of the skincare regimen resulted in a significant reduction in post-IPL erythema, stinging/burning, and itching. The majority of patients were very satisfied or satisfied and felt the treatment regimen improved various aspects of skin quality and the tolerability of the procedure., Conclusions: The addition of a topical skincare regimen after IPL treatment to the face resulted in significant improvements in facial photodamage and pigmentation, decreased post-treatment side effects, and increased tolerability., (© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: "Skin boosting" with injections of hyaluronic acid has been demonstrated to improve aged skin., Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of small-particle hyaluronic acid with lidocaine (SP-HAL) microaliquots for the correction of fine lines of the cheeks., Materials and Methods: Twenty subjects with mild to moderate static mid to lower cheek rhytides were enrolled. The right or left cheek was randomized to receive 1 mL of SP-HAL using a microdroplet technique, with the contralateral cheek treated with sham injection of sterile normal saline. The degree of cheek wrinkling and elastosis based on the Fitzpatrick-Goldman Wrinkle and Elastosis Scale was assessed at baseline and 7, 14, 30, 90, and 180 days after treatment. Subjects rated their satisfaction at days 90 and 180., Results: Fourteen patients completed the study. There were no statistically significant improvements in wrinkling or elastosis of the SP-HAL-treated cheek or control cheek at any time point. In addition, there were no significant differences in wrinkling, elastosis, or patient satisfaction between the treatment cheek and control cheek., Conclusion: One treatment of intradermal microdroplet injections of SP-HAL to the mid to lower cheek failed to show superiority over normal saline in improving clinical signs of skin wrinkling and elastosis.

Injection of neurotoxin is the most commonly performed cosmetic procedure in the United States, and the total number of male patients seeking botulinum has steadily increased over the years. Because of their unique aesthetic goals, expectations, and anatomy, men require differing botulinum toxin doses and techniques. This article provides an evidence-based approach to botulinum toxin in men. Each area of the face is discussed separately, focusing on gender differences in anatomy, treatment goals, and injection method., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Both subsurface monopolar radiofrequency (SMRF) and microfocused ultrasound with visualization (MFU-V) have demonstrated the ability to lift and tighten the neck. No head-to-head comparison study exists of these 2 technologies., Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of SMRF and MFU-V for the lifting and tightening of neck., Materials and Methods: Twenty subjects aged from 18 to 65 with moderate neck skin laxity were randomized to receive either one treatment of SMRF or MFU-V., Results: At Days 0, 30, 90, and 180, the mean (SD) investigator-assessed Neck Laxity Grade was 2.7 (0.67), 2.1 (1.1), 1.6 (1.2), and 0.86 (0.7), respectively, for patients treated with SMRF, and 2.8 (0.63), 2.4 (1.07), 1.5 (0.53), and 1.4 (0.7), respectively, for those treated with MFU-V. Both SMRF and MFU-V led to a significant decrease in the mean investigator-assessed Neck Laxity Grade by Day 90 and persistent to Day 180. Subject assessment of firmness, texture, and laxity also significantly improved by Day 90 and persistent to Day 180. Adverse events were mild and transient., Conclusion: There were no were statistically significant differences between SMRF and MFU-V in investigator-assessed and patient-assessed measures of neck laxity, patient satisfaction, and adverse events. Microfocused ultrasound with visualization was associated with more procedural pain.