Non-operative Facial Rejuvenation
Facial rejuvenation surgeries have been for a long while hot on the market. With rising demand and rising risk of undertaking these surgeries researchers and medical professionals have worked to create non-invasive procedures that prove less risky and work just as good as invasive procedures. Though limited, because of the risk and ethical issues surrounding these experiments, researches have been conducted using a number of non-invasive procedures to prove their effectiveness and safety of these procedures. With the rise in facial rejuvenation demands and the adverse effects of surgical treatments, non-operative facial rejuvenation treatments are on demand as they are deemed to have very little side effects while producing similar desirable results.
The first research conducted an analysis of the effectiveness of the Erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet modified with pulse technology as opposed to the traditional technology. Mysore (2018) set out on this research to find out the reoccurrence of facial acne scars after a switch to a different treatment. The research was done with a sample of eighty people with two different skin types and different types of scarring. The improved Er: YAG procedure resulted in a reduction of numbers of patients with recurring post acne scarring. On assessment of the patients by themselves and neutral observers, seventy eight of the 80 reported an improvement. The patients also showed high levels of satisfaction and less side effects were reported. The researches concluded that the new improved Er: YAG treatment that included pulse technology was effective and had the added advantage of less side effects reported.
Similar to this study, a study was conducted on 25 Indian patients to test the effectiveness of the ablative fractional laser using the Er: YAG technology on Indian skin. The Er; YAG is a laser instrument that used infrared light to remove facial scars. This experiment was conducted to test the versatility of the treatment on different types of skin. It resulted in an at least fair improvement of skin and different results on different scar types. With results of a ninety six percent improvement, patient satisfaction levels were higher than that of the observer. The treatment also proved to have no adverse effects. The researchers then concluded that the treatment was safe and effective on Indian skin (Pai, et.al 2016). Though tested on different types of skin and on different samples of patients, the two research papers agree in their conclusion having tested the same treatment. The treatment in the first research is not paired with any other treatment which supports the results in the second research that also uses the Er: YAG treatment in isolation.
In another research conducted on 30 patients presenting with the same skin problems the researchers tested the impact of sequencing the Non‐ablative fractionated laser and intense pulsed light on aging skin. This experiment was carried out as a result of the identified discomfort and adverse effects caused by other facial procedures. The results of the treatment were a gradual improvement of the skin but excellent after effects on several problems presented in aging skin. The patients were evaluated using regularly tied photos. The patients were able to tolerate the treatment and felt no discomfort. They also reported satisfaction with the results. Kautz (20148), concluded that combining the two treatments and administering them on the same day proved to be safe and produced significant rejuvenating effects on aging skin.
In another attempt to study the effectiveness of combining non-invasive face procedures, Gold, Biron and Sensing (2015) combined intense pulsed light, non-ablative continuous radio frequency, and fractional ablative radio frequency for skin rejuvenation. Non-ablative continuous radio frequency involves heating the skin under the epidermal layer without cutting through the skin. The treatments were alternated and involved 11 patients. Results showed statistically significant improvement in different skin problems within different time frames after administration of treatment. Problems of wrinkling, pigmentation, vascular lesions and laxity showed marked improvement over time. The research proved that combination of the intense pulsed light treatment proved to work on different skin lesions. No safety problems were reported which ascertained the safety of the treatment.
While testing different possibilities and treatments in treating skin problems and skin rejuvenation, these four research projects concluded with the same results. The researchers tested different possible treatments on different types of skin and proved that non-invasive facial rejuvenation is an effective and safe route of treatment. It is important to note that all the research experiments involved laser treatment. This attests that the effects of invasive facial rejuvenation surgery are avoidable and that safer treatments have been proved to produce similarly beneficial results.
A big part of facial reconstruction treatments is the satisfaction of the patients which in all four publications is recorded as high. High satisfaction rates of the after effects is a consistent report in the four research projects. With assessments of both the patients and observers’ results are evaluated fairly the viability of these treatment. These results show the feasibility and safety that comes with the non-invasive treatments for facial rejuvenation. Combining these treatments has proved to work by the two publications. The treatments however are not identical. This provides wide experimentation space to test the compatibility of other facial rejuvenation treatments.
Research on combining sink rejuvenation treatments were far from over. It is important to consider research that did not yield desirable outcomes. Keyvan, et.al (2016) conducted a research aimed at finding out the efficiency of pairing carbon dioxide laser treatment with autologous platelet-rich plasma in treating acne scars. Autologous platelet-rich plasma is a treatment traditionally known for its abilities to heal wounds fast. The researchers intended to find out if it works as well on acne scarring. The target skin on the patients which was their face, was divided into two where on one side the treatment was paired with laser treatment while on the other a normal saline solution was used together with the laser treatment.
The treatment worked well on acne scars but was not significant to be termed a success. The results also failed to hold up statistically long after treatment. In addition, the patients reported severe adverse effects on the side of the face where the plasma rich treatment was used. These effects also lasted longer. The researchers concluded the ineffectiveness of adding platelet-rich plasma to the normal laser treatment and the resulting of dangerous effects also added to its inefficiency. The results of this pair of treatment contracted the results in the other paired researches. While the others reported safety and less adverse effects, this combination resulted in an outburst of complications.
The skin products assessment research committee in another research, set to compare the outcome of conventional skin rejuvenation treatments to Obagi Nu-Derm system. The system involved a combination of products that serve different purposes and that display different results on the skin. The products range from cleaning to toning and sun screen products. Fifty-six women with different damage to their skin were enrolled. The study resulted in a higher score of after treatment skin redness and no significant difference in time taken to heal between the control group and the group that had undergone the Obagi Nu-Derm system of treatment. Without significant results to support success, the researchers concluded that there was no noteworthy difference between conventional treatment and the Obagi Nu-Derm system and that there was need for future research and evaluation of challenges.
Both research papers recorded similar results. Both researchers recorded insignificant improvement of the patients. Keyvan, et.al (2016), recorded adverse effects that were more serious than the traditional facial rejuvenation procedures. Research from paired treatments also produce differing results. The studies done by Knight (2018), Chathra (2018) and Michael et.al (2016) concluded with significant positive results from pairing the treatments. Pairing carbon dioxide laser with autologous platelet-rich plasma however, proved inefficient and caused severe effects on the patients.
Several questions rise with the rise in non-invasive facial rejuvenation procedures. People are worried about safety and most importantly effectiveness. Inarguably, presented research supports the effectiveness of specific treatments that need not be invasive in facial rejuvenation. Done on a variety of skin types and skin problems these treatments need to be adopted by both patients and physicians in order to have an all-round positive outcome. It is important however to note the specificity of these treatments as it contributes to the success rate. The combination patterns are also important to consider as they produce different results as evidenced by the research results.
REFERENCES
Chathra N, Mysore V. 2018. Resurfacing of facial acne scars with a new variable-pulsed Er:YAG laser in Fitzpatrick skin types IV and V. Journal of Cutaneous and Aesthetic Surgery. 11(1):20. doi:10.4103/jcas.jcas_4_18
Gold, M. H., Biron, J. A., & Sensing, W. (2016). Facial skin rejuvenation by combination treatment of IPL followed by continuous and fractional radiofrequency. Journal of Cosmetic and Laser Therapy, 18(1), 2-6.
Keyvan S, Faghihi G, Asilian A, Nouraei S, Behfar S, Nilforoushzadeh M. 2016. Efficacy of autologous platelet-rich plasma combined with fractional ablative carbon dioxide resurfacing laser in treatment of facial atrophic acne scars: A split-face randomized clinical trial. Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology, and Leprology. 82(2):162. doi:10.4103/0378-6323.174378
Knight JM, Kautz G. 2018. Sequential facial skin rejuvenation with intense pulsed light and non-ablative fractionated laser resurfacing in fitzpatrick skin type II-IV patients: A prospective multicenter analysis. Lasers in Surgery and Medicine. 51(2):141–149. doi:10.1002/lsm.23007
Pai S, Prabhu S, Kudur M, Nayak SK, Sripathi H, Rao R, Nirmal B. 2013. Efficacy and safety of Erbium-doped Yttrium Aluminium Garnet fractional resurfacing laser for treatment of facial acne scars. Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology, and Leprology. 79(2):193–198. doi:10.4103/0378-6323.107635
Pannucci CJ, Reavey PL, Kaweski S, Hamill JB, Hume KM, Wilkins EG, Pusic AL. 2011. A Randomized Controlled Trial of Skin Care Protocols for Facial Resurfacing: Lessons Learned from the Plastic Surgery Educational Foundationʼs Skin Products Assessment Research Study. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 127(3):1334–1342. doi:10.1097/prs.0b013e318204361d