Skip to main content

Laser-Assisted Liposuction (LAL) Versus Traditional Liposuction: Systematic Review

Abstract

Introduction

Liposuction is the most performed surgical procedure in Brazil and the second in the world. In recent years, new technologies have been developed in an attempt to improve liposuction, such as laser. The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of laser-assisted liposuction (LAL) compared to traditional liposuction through a systematic review of the literature.

Method

The search strategy used was the combination of the descriptors [lasers (MeSH Terms)] and (lipectomy [MeSH Terms]) in the PubMed database. Two independent researchers carried out the reading of the abstracts and selection of the studies according to the eligibility criteria. The risks of study bias were evaluated using an instrument similar to that used by the Cochrane Collaboration.

Results

Initially, 80 studies were obtained and, after evaluating the eligibility criteria, seven remained. Five of them observed that LAL has benefits when compared to traditional liposuction, and the main outcomes were compared with regard to histological analysis (2 products), further reduction of subcutaneous fat (2), better retraction of the skin (3), and higher personal satisfaction of the patient (2). The qualitative assessment identified high risks of bias in various areas in the studies.

Conclusion

Although studies have concluded that LAL promotes greater fat reduction, better skin retraction, and greater patient satisfaction compared to traditional liposuction, the high bias impedes a more reliable conclusion.

Level of Evidence III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. 1.

    https://www.isaps.org/Media/Default/globalstatistics/2016%20ISAPS%20Results.pdf

  2. 2.

    Franco FF, Basso RCF, Tincani AJ, Kharmandayan P (2012) Complicações em lipoaspiração clássica para fins estéticos. Revista Brasileira de Cirurgia Plástica 27:135–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Grazer FM, de Jong RH (2000) Fatal outcomes from liposuction: census survey of cosmetic surgeons. Plast Reconstr Surg 105:436–446

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Zocchi M (1992) Ultrasonic liposculpturing. Aesthet Plast Surg 16:287

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Salzman MJ (2009) Laser lipolysis using a 1064/1319-nm blended wavelength laser and internal temperature monitoring. Semin Cutan Med Surg 28:220–225

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Blum CA, Sasser CG, Kaplan JL (2013) Complications from laser-assisted liposuction performed by noncore practitioners. Aesthet Plast Surg 37:869–875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Jecan CR, Hernic AD, Tianu EC, Florescu IP, Lascăr I (2015) Histological differences between laser-assisted and suction-assisted lipoplasty aspirates—a comparative study. Rom J Morphol Embryol 56:797–801

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Valizadeh N, Jalaly NY, Zarghampour M, Barikbin B, Haghighatkhah HR (2016) Evaluation of safety and efficacy of 980-nm diode laser-assisted lipolysis versus traditional liposuction for submental rejuvenation: a randomized clinical trial. J Cosmet Laser Ther 18:41–45

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Wolfenson M, Hochman B, Ferreira LM (2015) Laser lipolysis: skin tightening in lipoplasty using a diode laser. Plast Reconstr Surg 135:1369–1377

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Brañas EB, Moraga JM (2013) Laser lipolysis using a 924- and 975-nm laser diode in the lower extremities. Aesthet Plast Surg 37:246–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    DiBernardo BE (2010) Randomized, blinded split abdomen study evaluating skin shrinkage and skin tightening in laser-assisted liposuction versus liposuction control. Aesthet Surg J 30:593–602

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Prado A, Andrades P, Danilla S, Leniz P, Castillo P, Gaete F (2006) A prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial comparing laser-assisted lipoplasty with suction-assisted lipoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 118:1032–1045

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Olmedo SL, Danilla S, Cavada G, Searle S, Ponce D, Navarrete L, Navarrete S, Calderón Ortega W (2007) Comparación del dolor secundario a lipoaspiración tradicional versus lipolisis láser. Estudio prospectivo, Cir plást Iberolatinoam, p 33

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Venkataram J (2008) Tumescent liposuction: a review. J Cutan Aesthet Surg 1:49–57

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Sasaki GH (2010) Quantification of human abdominal tissue tightening and contraction after component treatments with 1064-nm/1320-nm laser-assisted lipolysis: clinical implications. Aesthet Surg J 30:239–245

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Bazin AZ, Gondek LBE, Garcıa MJ, Valle LC, Flizikowski FB, de Noronha L (2005) Analysis of laser lipolysis effects on human tissue samples obtained from liposuction. Aesthet Plast Surg 29:281–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Goldman ASD, Blugerman GS (2002) Laser lipolysis: liposuction using Nd:YAG laser. Rev Soc Bras Cir Plast 17:17–26

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Az Badin, Moraes LM, Gondek L, Chiaratti MG, Canta L (2002) Laser lipolysis: flaccidity under control. Aesthet Plast Surg 26:335–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Matarasso A (2015) Discussion: laser lipolysis: skin tightening in lipoplasty using a diode laser. Plast Reconstr Surg 135:1378–1380

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Klassen AF, Cano SJ, Alderman A, Soldin M, Thoma A, Robson S, Kaur M, Papas A, Van Laeken N, Taylor VH, Pusic AL (2016) The BODY-Q: a patient-reported outcome instrument for weight loss and body contouring treatments. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 4:679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Avci P, Nyame TT, Gupta GK, Sadasivam M, Hamblin MR (2013) Low-level laser therapy for fat layer reduction: a comprehensive review. Lasers Surg Med 45:349–357

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Fakhouri TM, El Tal AK, Abrou AE, Mehregan DA, Barone F (2012) Laser-assisted lipolysis: a review. Dermatol Surg 38:155–169

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Mordon S, Plot E (2009) Laser lipolysis versus traditional liposuction for fat removal. Expert Rev Med Devices 6:677–688

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Berry MG, Davies D (2011) Liposuction: a review of principles and techniques. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 64:985–992

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Danilo Pereira-Netto.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pereira-Netto, D., Montano-Pedroso, J.C., Aidar, A.L.e. et al. Laser-Assisted Liposuction (LAL) Versus Traditional Liposuction: Systematic Review. Aesth Plast Surg 42, 376–383 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-018-1085-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Lipectomy
  • Liposuction
  • Lasers