Radiofrequency Devices
Radiofrequency devices emit focused electromagnetic waves that heat underlying tissues without targeting melanin. The release of thermal energy induces collagen contraction, neocollagenesis, and neovascularization, all of which aid in restoring the elasticity and moisture of the vaginal mucosa.25 Devices also may be equipped with cooling probes and reverse-heating gradients to protect the surface mucosa while deeper tissues are heated.
Millheiser et al26 performed a noncontrolled pilot study in 24 women with vaginal laxity using the Viveve System (Viveve), a cryogen-cooled monopolar RF device. Participants underwent a single 30-minute session (energy ranging from 75–90 J/cm2) during which the mucosal surface of the vaginal introitus (excluding the urethra) was treated with pulses at 0.5-cm overlapping intervals. Follow-up assessments were completed at 1, 3, and 6 months posttreatment. Self-reported vaginal tightness improved in 67% of participants at 1-month posttreatment and in 87% of participants at 6 months posttreatment (P<.001). There were no adverse events reported.26 Sekiguchi et al27 reported similar benefits lasting up to 12 months after a single 26-minute session at 90 J/cm2.
A prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial using the Viveve system was recently completed by Krychman et al.28 Participants (N=186) were randomized to receive a single session of active treatment (90 J/cm2) or placebo treatment (1 J/cm2). In both groups, the vaginal introitus was treated with pulses at 0.5 cm in overlapping intervals, with the entire area (excluding the urethra) treated 5 times up to a total of 110 pulses. The primary end point was the proportion of randomized participants reporting no vaginal laxity at 6 months postin-tervention, which was assessed using the Vaginal Laxity Questionnaire. A grade of no vaginal laxity was achieved by 43.5% of participants in the active treatment group and 19.6% of participants in the sham group (P=.002). Overall numbers of treatment-emergent adverse events were comparable between the 2 groups, with the most commonly reported being vaginal discharge (2.6% in the active treatment group vs 3.5% in the sham group). There were no serious adverse events reported in the active treatment group.28
ThermiVa (ThermiGen, LLC), a unipolar RF device, was evaluated by Alinsod29 in the treatment of orgasmic dysfunction. The noncontrolled study included 25 women with self-reported difficulty achieving orgasm during intercourse, each of whom underwent 3 treatment sessions at 1-month intervals. Of the 25 enrolled women, 19 (76%) reported an average reduction in time to orgasm of at least 50%. All anorgasmic patients (n=10) at baseline reported renewed ability to achieve orgasms. Two (8%) patients failed to achieve a significant benefit from the treatments. Of note, the study did not include a control group, and specific data on the durability of beneficial effects was lacking.29
The Ultra Femme 360 (BLT Industries Inc), a monopolar RF device, was evaluated by Lalji and Lozanova30 in a noncontrolled study of 27 women with mild to moderate vaginal laxity and urinary incontinence. Participants underwent 3 treatment sessions at weekly intervals. Vaginal laxity was assessed by a subjective vulvovaginal laxity questionnaire, and data were collected before the first treatment and at 1-month follow-up. All 27 participants reported improvements in vaginal laxity, with the average grade (SD) increasing from very loose (2.19 [1.08]) to moderately tight (5.74 [0.76]; P<.05) on the questionnaire’s 7-point scale. The trial did not include a control group.30
Conclusion
With growing patient interest in vaginal rejuvenation, clinicians are increasingly incorporating a variety of procedures into their practice. Although long-term data on the safety and efficacy of these treatments has yet to be established, current evidence indicates that fractional ablative lasers and RF devices can improve vaginal laxity, sexual sensation, and symptoms of GSM.
To date, major complications have not been reported, but the FDA has advocated caution until regulatory approval is achieved.10 Concerns exist over the limited number of robust clinical trials as well as the prevalence of advertising campaigns that promise wide-ranging improvements without sufficient evidence. Definitive statements on medical or cosmetic indications will undoubtedly require more thorough investigation. At this time, the safety profile of these devices appears to be favorable, and high rates of patient satisfaction have been reported. As such, noninvasive vaginal rejuvenation procedures may represent a valuable addition to the cosmetic landscape.