脂肪团,皮肤形貌的感知变化,主要存在于富含脂肪组织的身体区域,如臀部,臀部,大腿,和腹部。与普遍的信念相反,脂肪团的病因和病理生理学尚未得到充分证实或普遍同意。对脂肪团的实际病因缺乏了解直接影响了选择合适的治疗方法,这些治疗方法可以解决该病症的美学和炎症方面的问题。各种治疗方法,包括电流等电物理因子,射频,超声,和光生物调节,已经过测试。然而,许多研究的方法学质量令人怀疑,使确定脂肪团的有效治疗方法变得复杂。在这项研究中,我们对利用电物理药物治疗脂肪团的临床研究进行了系统评价.
方法:我们采用了PICO(人口,干预,control,和结果)制定我们的搜索策略并建立纳入/排除标准的过程。我们搜索了五个数据库:Medline,中央,Scopus,丁香花,还有PEDro,在2001年至2021年7月之间进行的研究中,涉及使用电物理药物进行脂肪团治疗。为了确保系统性和指导研究选择,我们遵守系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南的首选报告项目。
结果:我们最初的搜索产生了556篇文章:379来自Medline,159来自中央,和18来自丁香。在应用我们的纳入标准后,仅剩下32项研究。其中,通过QualSyst工具,只有2例(6.2%)被评估为具有强大和良好的方法.
结论:我们的研究结果表明,关于使用电物理药物治疗脂肪团的临床研究的证据质量仍然低于标准。需要进一步研究可靠的实验设计和更精确的评估技术。虽然我们的研究没有反驳用于脂肪团治疗的技术的有效性,它强调需要额外的精心设计的试验。
Cellulite, a perceived alteration in skin topography, is predominantly found in adipose tissue-rich body regions such as the hips, buttocks, thighs, and abdomen. Contrary to common belief, the etiology and pathophysiology of cellulite are not well-established or universally agreed upon. This lack of understanding about the actual etiology of cellulite directly influences the selection of suitable treatments that can address both the aesthetic and inflammatory aspects of the condition. Various treatment methods, including electrophysical agents like electric currents, radiofrequency, ultrasound, and photobiomodulation, have been tested. However, the questionable methodological quality of many studies complicates the determination of effective treatments for cellulite. In this study, we conducted a systematic
review of clinical studies that utilized electrophysical agents in cellulite treatment.
METHODS: We employed the PICO (population, intervention, control, and outcome) process to develop our search strategy and establish inclusion/exclusion criteria. We searched five databases: Medline, Central, Scopus, Lilacs, and PEDro, for studies conducted between 2001 and July 2021 that involved cellulite treatment with electrophysical agents. To ensure systematicity and guide study selection, we adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines.
RESULTS: Our initial search yielded 556 articles: 379 from Medline, 159 from Central, and 18 from Lilacs. After applying our inclusion criteria, only 32 studies remained. Of these, only two (6.2%) were evaluated as having strong and good methodology via the QualSyst tool.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that the quality of evidence from clinical studies on the use of electrophysical agents for cellulite treatment remains subpar. Further studies with robust experimental designs and more precise assessment techniques are necessary. While our study does not refute the effectiveness of the techniques used for cellulite treatment, it underscores the need for additional well-designed trials.