Auh Sogyong L, Iyengar Sanjana, Weil Alexandra, Bolotin Diana, Cartee Todd V, Dover Jeffrey S, Maher Ian A, Sobanko Joseph F, Cohen Joel L, Poon Emily, Alam Murad
Section of Dermatology, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Department of Dermatology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.
Lasers Surg Med. 2018 Feb;50(2):96-110. doi: 10.1002/lsm.22761. Epub 2017 Dec 6.
Noninvasive fat reduction appears effective, but there are various methods for quantifying changes. The objective of this review is to assess comparative utility measures of subcutaneous fat.
STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS: Articles describing noninvasive fat reduction were searched using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Scopus electronic databases on two dates (January 28, 2014 and February 16, 2016). Titles of studies and abstracts were screened for eligibility. Manual review was performed by two investigators to detect those that: (1) included original data; (2) were randomized controlled trials, or prospective or retrospective cohort studies; (3) quantified fat outcomes; and (4) enrolled at least 10 subjects.
Of 1,057 retrieved articles, 36 met criteria. Most reported four or more measurement techniques. Circumference measurements were most commonly cited. Other objective techniques, like caliper thickness, ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and three-dimensional (3D) photography, were also used. Common subjective methods were evaluation of standardized photographs by blinded raters and patient satisfaction surveys.
For quantifying noninvasive fat reduction, all available methods had significant limitations: photographic comparisons were subjective; circumference or caliper measurements were confounded; ultrasound was operator dependent; MRI was expensive; computed models and simulations were in early development. As new technologies are developed, the need for reliable, accurate and practical measures of subcutaneous fat will increase. Lasers Surg. Med. 50:96-110, 2018. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
非侵入性减脂似乎有效，但有多种方法可用于量化变化。本综述的目的是评估皮下脂肪的比较效用指标。
研究设计/材料与方法：分别于2014年1月28日和2016年2月16日，使用MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL和Scopus电子数据库检索描述非侵入性减脂的文章。对研究标题和摘要进行筛选以确定其是否符合条件。由两名研究人员进行人工评审，以找出符合以下条件的研究：（1）包含原始数据；（2）为随机对照试验、前瞻性或回顾性队列研究；（3）量化脂肪结果；（4）纳入至少10名受试者。
在检索到的1057篇文章中，36篇符合标准。大多数文章报告了四种或更多的测量技术。最常被引用的是周长测量。还使用了其他客观技术，如卡尺厚度测量、超声、磁共振成像（MRI）和三维（3D）摄影。常见的主观方法是由不知情的评分者对标准化照片进行评估以及患者满意度调查。
对于量化非侵入性减脂，所有可用方法都有显著局限性：照片比较具有主观性；周长或卡尺测量存在混淆因素；超声依赖操作人员；MRI成本高昂；计算模型和模拟尚处于早期开发阶段。随着新技术的发展，对可靠、准确且实用的皮下脂肪测量方法的需求将会增加。《激光外科与医学》50:96 - 110, 2018。© 2017威利期刊公司
