INTRODUCTION: New plastic surgery devices have been development to improve results in liposuction procedures like Vibration Amplification of Sound Energy at Resonance (VASER) is one of those devices that revolutionized liposuction surgery.
Liposuction developed in 1977, with many changes over the years on cannulas, aspirating devices, assist with external devices on fat emulsification, tumescent infiltration, in late 1980s Zocchi described the use of ultrasonic lipoplasty in which fat was liquefied with ultrasonic energy and then evacuated from subcutaneous space reducing trauma and blood loss in patients1.
Vibration amplification of sound energy at resonance (VASER) is a third-generation ultrasound-assisted modality of liposuction. Which was introduced to the United States in the early 90s and now stands as the most popular of its kind2. This system uses ultrasound energy at a 36 kHz frequency to separate the adipose cells from its tissue matrix through stable cavitation and acoustic streaming3. By this mechanism it facilitates fat emulsification and extraction, preserving vascularization and improving the long-term aesthetic results4. In 2009 Nagy and Vanek published a multicenter, prospective, randomized, single-blind, clinical trial comparing VASER-assisted lipoplasty and Suction-Assisted lipoplasty finding improved skin retraction and reduction in blood loss compared to suction-assisted lipoplasty5.
METHODS: This prospective study compared two different devices (VASER, Solta Medical Inc. Hayward Calif.) and the new HEUS (Inomedica, México) for liposuction procedures. Thirteen patients (2 males and 11 females) between the ages of 21 and 46 years received Ultrasound-Assisted liposuction with both devices, one side with HEUS-assisted liposuction and the contralateral side treated with VASER-assisted liposuction; the side of the patients treated with HEUS and VASER were randomized. We used the devices in the same conditions, same anatomical areas, time applied in each area, device power parameters (%), fat aspirated volume and surgeon, the assigned side was randomly assigned to VASER and HEUS.
We measured bio-mechanical skin parameters: distensibility, Net-elasticity, Biological-Elasticity, Skin Hydration, Erythema and Melanin with cutometer MPA 580. 2 sides were compared. In the statistical analysis, no statistically significant differences were observed in any of the functional or biomechanical parameters.
CONCLUSION: According to cutometer there was no difference between HEUS ultrasonic liposuction device and VASER, HEUS is a safe option to archive good results in liposuction surgery, this device is currently use over Mexico and Latin America.
References:
1. Beidas OE, Gusenoff JA. Update on Liposuction: What All Plastic Surgeons Should Know. Plast Reconstr Surg. Published online 2021:658E-668E.
2. Chia CT, Neinstein RM, Theodorou SJ. Evidence-Based Medicine: Liposuction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;139(1):267e-274e. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000002859
3. Schafer ME, Hicok KC, Mills DC, Cohen SR, Chao JJ. Acute adipocyte viability after third-generation ultrasound-assisted liposuction. Aesthet Surg J. 2013;33(5):698-
4. Hoyos A, Perez ME, Guarin DE, Montenegro A. A report of 736 high-definition lipoabdominoplasties performed in conjunction with circumferential VASER liposuction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;142(3):662-675.
5. Nagy MW, Vanek PF. A multicenter, prospective, randomized, single-blind, controlled clinical trial comparing vaser-assisted lipoplasty and suction-assisted lipoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;129(4).