PEER-REVIEW | FACIAL AESTHETICS |
Figure 6 Skin wrinkles digital features count variations
(standardised L + R cheek Visia complexion analysis
measurements — median values) and corresponding
percentages of global wrinkles reduction (L + R
cheek — median values) at
T1 = baseline, T2 = 15 days, and T3 = 45 days post-treatment
35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
WRINKLE FEATURE COUNT VARIATION 31.85
24.45 26.50
measured first in order to avoid possible secondary vaso-reactivity induced by the suction probe used to measure elastometry. All measurements were taken at constant thermal comfort room parameters, immediately before the first treatment session (T1), and subsequently at 45 days (T2 - T1 + 45 days) and 75 days (T3 - T1 + 75 days).
T1 T2 T3 0% -5%
-10% -15%
-20% -25%
T1 Subjective
assessment of clinical results were obtained 15 days and 45 days after
completion of full treatment sessions.
T2 -23.23% T3 (Canon Inc.). In the aim to standardise templates, all
subjects were asked to wash off any make-up before photographic sessions and rest sitting for 15 minutes at constant thermal comfort room parameters: temperature (23.5–25.5°C) and relative humidity (50±5%). At the end of each photographic session an in vivo 3D photographic quantitative measurement of skin texture, wrinkles and superficial pigmented alterations was obtained using a Visia Complexion Analysis standardised photographic system with Visia 5 software (Canfield Imaging System, Canfield Scientific, NJ, USA).
Erythema and elastometry Skin erythema was measured using a II ColorMeter (Cortex Technology, Denmark). Elastometry values were measured using a Dermacheck Multi Skin Center MC750 (Courage-Khazaka Electronic GmbH Koln, Germany). All measurements were taken on standardised facial anatomical landmarks identified by the intersection between a vertical line passing though the centre of the pupil and a horizontal line touching the base of the columella on both cheeks. Erythema was
Figure 7 Skin dyspigmentation digital
features count (standardised L + R cheek Visia complexion analysis brown spots
measurements —median
values) and corresponding global skin dyspigmentation percentage variations (L + R cheek — median values) at
T1 = baseline, T2 = 15 days, and T3 = 45 days post-treatment
30 ❚
125 120 115 110 105 100
T1 GLOBAL SPOTS FEATURE COUNT 121.20 108.25 109
14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0
T2 T3 -16.80%
GLOBAL WRINKLE REDUCTION % 0%
Subject’s self-assessment Simple questionnaires to evaluate subjective intra-operative perceived sensations were given to each subject at the end of the first treatment (T1–IOP) and at the end of the full eight treatment sessions (T1 + 30 days–IOP). Seven parameters were evaluated during LED exposure: ■ Pleasant feeling (PF) ■ Absence of pain (AOP) ■ Safety perception (SP) ■ Absence of fear (AOF) ■ Burning perception (BP) ■ Warmth perception (WP) ■ Claustrophobia perception (CP). Four different sensations were evaluated immediately
after the end of the first treatment (T1-END) and at the end of the complete treatment sessions (T1 + 30 days–END): pleasant feeling (PF); absence of pain (AOP); burning perception (BP); and warmth perception (WP). Five more subjective perceptions were evaluated 24 hours after the first treatment (T1-END + 24 hours) and after the complete treatment sessions (T1 + 30 days + 24 hours): ■ Not interfering with social activities (NISA) ■ Not interfering with make-up use (NIMU) ■ Absence of pain (AOP) ■ Absence of desquamation (AOD) ■ Absence of redness (AOR). Each parameter was evaluated according to a
five-point scale as follows: 1 = totally disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = indifferent, 4 = partially agree, 5 = completely agree. Subjective assessment of clinical results were obtained
15 days (T2 - T1 + 45 days) and 45 days after completion of full treatment sessions (T3 - T1 + 75 days). Study subjects were previously instructed on how to evaluate their skin tone improvement, wrinkle reduction, colour uniformity improvement, and skin texture improvement; thus, all parameters were subjectively evaluated on a five-point assessment scale as follows: 1 = totally ineffective, 2 = moderately effective, 3 = effective, 4 = very effective, and 5 = extremely effective.
GLOBAL SPOTS VARIATION % 11.96%
0% T1 T2
0.69% T3
March 2013 |
prime-journal.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140