VelaSmooth vs. VelaShape - what's the difference?

I was an FDA investigator for the first generation Vela, called the VelaSmooth, back in the fall of 2004. Initially, we had expected the FDA approval for December 2004, but it was delayed because there were reports of actual fat reduction in addition to cellulite reduction.

Additional FDA investigators were added and further testing was underway. The FDA finally approved this device in June 2005 for cellulite reduction. There were no reports of adverse reactions. The device was interesting because it was the first time a medical device was being used to target cellulite effectively.

The combination of infrared light with bipolar radiofrequency electrical energy turned out to be an excellent way to treat the fat that resided just below the skin within connective tissue.

During the FDA trials, we were given instructions to perform the treatment 5 minutes per area, which would complete the treatment within 30-45 minutes, performed twice a week, for a total of 8 treatments. While this approach standardized how all the investigators were performing the treatments, it did not personalize the treatment for each individual in order to optimize results. It did not address the "target" clinical endpoint of a treatment. In other words, it didn't have the provider optimizing the treatment to assure the best results.

In our practice we began increasing the length of treatment and focused on hitting certain endpoints of sustained radience of heat and erythema (redness) of the skin. Knowing the physiological changes that would occur with certain endpoints resulted in consistent, excellent results. We would begin seeing positive changes in patients’ cellulite and skin quality after 3 treatments, and continuing improvements until 8-10 treatments.

One month after the FDA approval in June 2005, there was a large meeting of all the investigators to share experiences with the device and to optimize treatment protocols. Many practices had results that would vary depending on the provider who administered the treatment. The most successful treatments came from practices that would spend the most time and generate sustained warmth and erythema on the patient. We realized that with some simple endpoint requirements and with good technique, we had consistent reliable results that included cellulite smoothing, fat reduction (average 1 inch reduction of thighs or 2 inches of abdomen), and firming of the skin. Total treatment sessions were 8 – 10 treatments.

From 2005 until 2007, there were at least 2 upgrades to the device. The latest was the “Power Pack” upgrade, which increased the energy output of the device. This also maximized the results when using the “contour” treatment head for targeted fat reduction and body contouring. Total treatments were slightly reduced to approximately 8 treatments for optimum results.

Since the approval of the VelaSmooth in 2005, I have presented the technology and clinical results to hundreds of doctors in the USA and internationally. This included 3 conferences of the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine in 2006 and 2007, and the Regional Conference on Dermatology in Sept 2006 in Bali, Indonesia, and a 70+ city speaking tour around the United States from 2006-2007. During these numerous meetings, I would often hear from doctors and practices that had great results and successes with the VelaSmooth.

However, I would also occasionally hear from a practice that had variable or poor results. Or I would hear from a client of another practice that had less-than-optimal results. Whenever I investigated further into the technique or clinical endpoints, I would find out that the provider was doing it wrong. Most of the time, it resulted from a provider that just didn’t have the focus or patience to perform the treatment as it was supposed to be done. This would really bother me, because the practices that were poorly treating patients were also causing damage to the reputation and market of the VelaSmooth.

This motivated me to continue on the speaking tour in order to raise the standards of the treatment technique. What I did know was that the VelaSmooth was a reliable and consistent device that would do both cellulite reduction and body contouring, when it was performed in our office with our treatment technique. We also started to have breakthrough discoveries in how to attain even better results with more aggressive settings and treatment times. So it was very exciting when Syneron’s new VelaShape was announced and the FDA approved it in August 2007 for circumferential reduction.

What we noticed immediately was that the VelaShape was redesigned to address some of the shortcomings of the VelaSmooth. It was easier to change back and forth between the large and small treatment heads. The machine was quieter and lighter. It was easier to move the head around on the skin, and it was more comfortable for the patients. And the new machine delivered 2 ½ times the Radiofrequency electrical energy as the old VelaSmooth. We were able to reach the important clinical endpoints reliably within the first 2 minutes. Previously this would take 2 or 3 times longer to reach the endpoints using good technique.

Knowing what we knew with the VelaSmooth, and how to make it work reliably and effectively for the patients, we immediately knew that the outcomes for the VelaShape would be much better. These new VelaShape clients have seen between 2” to 4” circumferential reduction of the abdomen after 4 treatments in our practice. The thighs have seen approx 1" to 2" reduction on average. Needless to say, we are very happy with the upgrade from the VelaSmooth to the VelaShape.

It is relatively new (Sept. 2007 release) and there are many new practices just learning about how to use the device and therefore may have variable results. However, over time, these practices will learn the new advanced protocols and how to recognize the proper endpoints, and provide the high level of success that we have seen with the VelaShape.