Study to Evaluate the Safety and Effectiveness of the RAP Device for the Improvement in the Appearance of Cellulite
A Single Center Prospective Study to Evaluate the Safety and Effectiveness of the Soliton® Rapid Acoustic Pulse (RAP)™Device for the Improvement in the Appearance of Cellulite.
1 other identifier
interventional
15
1 country
1
Brief Summary
The purpose of this single site clinical study is to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the Soliton Rapid Acoustic Pulse (RAP) device for the improvement of cellulite comparing two different RAP treatment doses.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at below P25 for not_applicable
Started May 2021
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
May 4, 2021
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
October 21, 2021
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
November 22, 2021
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
January 20, 2022
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
July 28, 2022
CompletedMay 3, 2023
May 1, 2023
6 months
November 22, 2021
May 1, 2023
Conditions
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (3)
Assessing safety
The primary safety short-term endpoint to be met if all treated participants were free from unexpected adverse events (UAEs) or serious adverse events (SAEs) attributable to the RAP treatment immediately post-treatment
Immediately post treatment
Assessing safety
The primary safety short-term endpoint to be met if all treated participants were free from unexpected adverse events (UAEs) or serious adverse events (SAEs) attributable to the RAP treatment at the short-term (12-week) visit.
12 weeks post treatment
Assessing Efficacy
The primary effectiveness objective was to demonstrate improvement in the appearance of cellulite from the 100 Hz treatment is comparable to the 50 Hz treatment. Efficacy determined by the results of a blinded independent physician assessment (IPA) panel correctly identifying the 12-week post-treatment photographs from randomly placed side-by-side comparison of before and after photographs for both treatments. The primary effectiveness endpoint will be met if the rate of correctly identified before and after photos for 100 Hz treatment is not significantly lower than the 50 Hz treatment assessment.
At 12 week follow up visit
Secondary Outcomes (1)
Assessing Participant Satisfaction
At the 12 week follow up visit
Study Arms (1)
Each leg/buttock will be treated with the RAP device
EXPERIMENTALEach leg will be treated with standard RAP treatment settings.One leg will receive treatments with 100Hz and the other with 50hz
Interventions
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Seeking treatment of cellulite in the thigh and/or buttock areas
- Area of moderate to severe cellulite on thigh and/or buttock for both legs using the Cellulite Dimple - At Rest Scale at Baseline with grades of 2 or 3 based on review of photos taken under the same lightening conditions planned for the trial.
- Body Mass Index (B.M.I.) is ≤ 30
- Participant will not have had invasive or energy-based cellulite treatments (liposuction, subcision, RF, laser, ESWT, etc.) for the prior 12 months.
- Participant will not have used topical based cellulite treatments for prior 6 months and will not use during the trial.
- Participant will not have used spray-on tanning treatments for 6 months prior to the initiation of the trial. Furthermore, participants will not use spray-on tanning treatments during the term of the trial.
- Participants must be able to provide written informed consent, understand and is willing to comply with all study related procedures and follow-up visits.
You may not qualify if:
- Participant is unwilling to have research photos taken of treatment areas in the presence of Sponsor's researchers.
- Participant is unwilling to have RAP treatment provided in the presence of Sponsor's researchers.
- Participant is pregnant or planning to become pregnant during the duration of the study.
- Participant is unwilling to commit to follow-up visits
- Metal or plastic implants in the area of the treatment (vascular stent, or implants in the hips, knees, etc.).
- Active electronic implants such as pacemakers, defibrillators.
- History of coagulopathy(ies) and/or on anticoagulant medication.
- Skin disorders (skin infections or rashes, extensive scarring, psoriasis, etc.) in the treatment area.
- Any surgical procedure in the treatment areas in the prior 3 months or planned during the duration of the study.
- Participant is a current smoker.
- Participant has tattoo in treatment area.
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
- Solitonlead
Study Sites (1)
The Practice of Brian Biesman
Nashville, Tennessee, 37203, United States
Related Publications (1)
Biesman BS, Capelli CC. Comparing safety and efficacy of acoustic subcision at two different rapid acoustic pulse rates to improve the appearance of cellulite. Lasers Surg Med. 2024 Jan;56(1):32-38. doi: 10.1002/lsm.23718. Epub 2023 Sep 11.
PMID: 37694399DERIVED
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- STUDY DIRECTOR
Chris Capelli, MD
Sponsor GmbH
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- NA
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- SINGLE GROUP
- Sponsor Type
- INDUSTRY
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
November 22, 2021
First Posted
January 20, 2022
Study Start
May 4, 2021
Primary Completion
October 21, 2021
Study Completion
July 28, 2022
Last Updated
May 3, 2023
Record last verified: 2023-05