EFFECTS OF AN ULTRASOUND TREATMENT PROGRAM, ASSOCIATED OR NOT WITH PHYSICAL EXERCISE, FOR REDUCTION OF FAT DEPOSITS

Polozzi Pedroso S.¹, Silveira Carvalho R.A.¹, Petraglia L.², Brighetti Ribas A.E.², Grassi-Kassisse D.M.³, Xavier de Oliveira Crege D.R.¹

¹University Center Padre Anchieta, Physical Therapy, Jundiai, Brazil, ²University Center Padre Anchieta, Jundiai, Brazil, ³University of Campinas (Unicamp), Campinas, Brazil

Background: The continuous search for the perfect body has made people seek for esthetic treatments, to improve self-esteem. Many of these procedures aim to reduce fat deposits. Several non-invasive treatments have been proposed to replace liposuction, and ultrasound (US) is one of the most used. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of this treatment has not be done before.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluated the effects of US 3MHz, associated or not to physical exercise, as a treatment to reduce abdominal fat deposits.

Methods: 22 women, age between 30–45 years old, sedentary, were selected. They performed 12 sessions, twice a week, with US 3MHz (Manthus Equipment – KLD) adjusted in the program for lipolysis stimulation. Women were separated in two groups: USG – Only US treatment; USEG – US followed by 20 minutes of aerobic exercise, in treadmill, with intensity between 42 and 56% of the heart rate reserve. The US application time was determinate according to the size of the treated area, divided by the US effective radiation area. At the first session of the treatment (FT), after the sixth (ST) and at the end of the treatment (ET), were collected the following data: abdominal circumference (cm), abdominal skinfold (mm) and urine samples to determinate glycerol (mmol/mL). In these days, the volunteers collected the first urine of the day and the first urine sample after the treatment session. The results are presented as means ± SEM. Kolmogorov-Smirnov was used to evaluate the normality of data, then parametric and no parametric test was applied to analyzed the significance, which is considered when p 0.05.

Results: The proposed treatment did not promote alterations in abdominal circumference, however, both groups showed significant reduction in abdominal skinfold. Compared to the FT, this reduction was significant after the sixth and the last session (USG: FT: 49.2 ± 2.8 vs. ST: 43 ± 2.5; ET: 34 ± 1.8). Associated exercise also induced reduction after the sixth and the last session (USEG: FT: 42 ± 2.1 vs. ST: 36 ± 1.3; ET: 29 ± 1.3). The reduction was accentuated after the sixth session (USG: ST: 43 ± 2.5 vs. USEG: ST: 36 ± 1.3). USG increased significantly urine glycerol, after the first session (Initial: 0.32 ± 0.10 vs. After: 0.75 ± 0.16). Basal also increased after the sixth and the last session, compared to the basal of the first session (ST: 0.88 ± 0.16 and 0.91 ± 0.17). USEG did not altered glycerol amounts.

Conclusion(s): Our results showed that isolated US treatment was efficient to reduce abdominal skinfold and increased glycerol in urine, after the first session and in the moment before the sixth and the end of treatment. Associated exercise intensified US effect after the sixth session and avoided alterations in urine glycerol.

Implications: These findings suggested that adjustments in US intensity should be necessary for better results in prolonged treatments. We also suggest that the exercise intensity, after the sixth session, should be considered, to improve the efficiency of US in induce lipolysis.

Funding acknowledgements: This work was supported by University Center Padre Anchieta.

Topic: Professional practice: other

Ethics approval: This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of University Center Padre Anchieta (protocol number 701.316).

All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.