CLINICAL IDENTIFICATION AND THERAPEUTIC APPROACHES TO PARADOXICAL ADIPOSE HYPERPLASIA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF POST-CRYOLIPOLYSIS COMPLICATIONS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31435/ijitss.3(47).2025.3657Keywords:
Cryolipolysis, Paradoxical Adipose Hyperplasia, Body Contouring, Coolsculpting, Liposuction, Adverse EffectsAbstract
Background: Cryolipolysis has emerged as a popular non-invasive body contouring procedure for localized fat reduction. While generally considered safe, paradoxical adipose hyperplasia (PAH) represents a rare but significant adverse effect characterized by paradoxical growth of adipose tissue in treated areas.
Purpose: This review aims to systematically evaluate the current literature regarding the clinical identification, incidence, pathophysiology, risk factors, and therapeutic management approaches for PAH following cryolipolysis procedures.
Materials and Methods: A comprehensive search of electronic databases including PubMed, Scopus, MEDLINE, and Embase was conducted for articles published between January 2010 and December 2023. Keywords included “cryolipolysis,” “paradoxical adipose hyperplasia,” “CoolSculpting complications,” and “post-cryolipolysis adverse effects.”
Results: Nineteen studies met inclusion criteria, comprising documented cases of PAH. The estimated incidence ranges from 0.0051% to 0.72%, with higher rates observed in studies employing active surveillance methods. Clinical identification features include delayed-onset, sharply demarcated, firm enlargement of the treated area. Male sex and treatment of abdominal areas were identified as potential risk factors. Management approaches include observation, massage therapy, energy-based treatments, and surgical intervention, with liposuction demonstrating the highest efficacy rates.
Conclusions: PAH remains an uncommon but distressing complication of cryolipolysis with potentially significant psychosocial impact on affected patients. This review establishes clinical identification criteria and provides evidence-based management recommendations for practitioners.
References
Manstein D, Laubach H, Watanabe K, et al. Selective cryolysis: a novel method of non-invasive fat removal. Lasers Surg Med. 2008;40(9):595-604.
Avram MM, Harry RS. Cryolipolysis for subcutaneous fat layer reduction. Lasers Surg Med. 2009;41(10):703-708.
Zelickson B, Egbert BM, Preciado J, et al. Cryolipolysis for noninvasive fat cell destruction: initial results from a pig model. Dermatol Surg. 2009;35(10):1462-1470.
Jalian HR, Avram MM, Garibyan L, et al. Paradoxical adipose hyperplasia after cryolipolysis. JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150(3):317-319.
Dierickx CC, Mazer JM, Sand M, et al. Safety, tolerance, and patient satisfaction with noninvasive cryolipolysis. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39(8):1209-1216.
Stevens WG, Pietrzak LK, Spring MA. Broad overview of a clinical and commercial experience with CoolSculpting. Aesthet Surg J. 2013;33(6):835-846.
Ingargiola MJ, Motakef S, Chung MT, et al. Cryolipolysis for fat reduction and body contouring: safety and efficacy of current treatment paradigms. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;135(6):1581-1590.
Bernstein EF, Bloom JD, Basilavecchio LD, et al. Non-invasive fat reduction of the flanks using a new cryolipolysis applicator and overlapping treatments. Lasers Surg Med. 2014;46(10):731-735.
Ho D, Jagdeo J. A systematic review of paradoxical adipose hyperplasia (PAH) post-cryolipolysis. J Drugs Dermatol. 2017;16(1):62-67.
Kelly ME, Rodríguez-Feliz J, Torres C, et al. Treatment of paradoxical adipose hyperplasia following cryolipolysis: a single-center experience. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;142(1):17e-22e.
Nikolis A, Enright KM. A multicenter evaluation of paradoxical adipose hyperplasia following cryolipolysis for fat reduction and body contouring: a review of 8658 cycles in 2114 patients. Aesthet Surg J. 2021;41(8):932-941.
Singh SM, Geddes ER, Boutrous SG, et al. Paradoxical adipose hyperplasia secondary to cryolipolysis: an underreported entity? Lasers Surg Med. 2015;47(6):476-478.
Seaman SA, Tannan SC, Cao Y, et al. Paradoxical adipose hyperplasia and cellular effects after cryolipolysis: a case report. Aesthet Surg J. 2016;36(1):NP6-NP13.
Sasaki GH, Abelev N, Tevez-Ortiz A. Noninvasive selective cryolipolysis and reperfusion recovery for localized natural fat reduction and contouring. Aesthet Surg J. 2014;34(3):420-431.
Ferraro GA, De Francesco F, Cataldo C, et al. Synergistic effects of cryolipolysis and shock waves for noninvasive body contouring. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2012;36(3):666-679.
Kilmer SL, Burns AJ, Zelickson BD. Safety and efficacy of cryolipolysis for non-invasive reduction of submental fat. Lasers Surg Med. 2016;48(1):3-13.
Boey GE, Wasilenchuk JL. Enhanced clinical outcome with manual massage following cryolipolysis treatment: a 4-month study of safety and efficacy. Lasers Surg Med. 2014;46(1):20-26.
Hunstad JP, Repta R. Atlas of Abdominoplasty. 1st ed. Saunders; 2008.
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71.
Harrington JL, Capizzi PJ. Cryolipolysis for nonsurgical reduction of fat in the lateral chest wall post-mastectomy. Aesthet Surg J. 2017;37(6):715-722.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
All articles are published in open-access and licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Hence, authors retain copyright to the content of the articles.
CC BY 4.0 License allows content to be copied, adapted, displayed, distributed, re-published or otherwise re-used for any purpose including for adaptation and commercial use provided the content is attributed.
How to Cite
