Assessment of biomechanical skin properties: is cellulitic skin different?
BACKGROUND
An objective in vivo measurement of viscoelastic skin properties is difficult. Consequently, the clinician's ability to evaluate the effectiveness of therapies that may affect skin pliability and skin surface characteristics is limited.


OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of the Biomechanical Tissue Characterization BTC-2000 System for objective, noninvasive assessment of viscoelastic skin properties, specifically by testing the hypothesis that cellulite-affected skin may have different biomechanical characteristics than skin without a cellulitic appearance.


METHODS
A prospective study comparing 2 closely matched, nonrandomized groups of 15 women with and without cellulite in cellulite-prone areas was conducted. Biomechanical parameters including skin laxity, elastic and viscoelastic deformation, stiffness, energy absorption depicting overall tissue compliance, and elasticity were measured in an area prone to cellulite (the lateral thigh) and one not prone to cellulite (the posterior shoulder).


RESULTS
The degree of the elastic deformation on the maximum pressure, stiffness, and elasticity was similar for all areas in both groups (P > .05). Comparisons of individual parameters showed decreased elastic deformity and laxity of skin among individuals with no cellulite in the cellulite-prone area (P < .05), whereas there was no significant difference between the groups in the cellulite-nonprone area (P > .05). In addition, in volunteers with cellulite, lateral thigh and posterior shoulder skin was remarkably softer, as reflected by energy absorption, than in those without cellulite (P < .05).


CONCLUSIONS
An assessment of volunteers with and without cellulite in cellulite-prone and non-prone areas demonstrated that BMT-2000 technology allows noninvasive, reproducible measurements of selected biomechanical skin properties. Such measurements will be useful in assessing changes in skin laxity and elasticity in aesthetic surgical and nonsurgical treatments, and in evaluating skin, skin care programs, and cosmeceutical agents. (Aesthetic Surg J 2002;22:260-266.).
Dobke
Marek K
MK
Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA.
Dibernardo
Barry
B
Thompson
R Carl
RC
Usal
Hakan
H