Plasma Upper Eyelid Tightening case study.
In this page you will find:
- The video Summary of this Case Study also showing the sprayed skin tightening procedure carried out also using the spray operation. As you may know, usually the spot operation is used instead.
- An overview of the background of the subject undergoing the treatment.
- Why the Spray operation has been used and a brief explanation of how differently it can be applied.
- Some information about the people carrying out the aesthetic procedure.
- What numbing product was used during the procedure
- The after-care carried out by the subject in this particular case.
- How it feels during the recovery process.
- A brief explanation of the long-term skin recovery.
- Comparison of the before and after pictures.
- You will see the before pictures taken in July 2014.
- Pictures were taken in November 2016, over a year after the eyelid tightening procedure.
You do not need to study all the whole content of this web-page in detail if you do not want. You can simply have an overview of the content of this case study by simply watching the video.
The length of the video at normal speed is 15 minutes because it shows the treatment in its entirety. We have therefore edited a fast-forwarded version only lasting 5 minutes. If you would like to watch the fast-forwarded version please click here.
About the subject of this case study.
The subject presented in this case study is Andreas Russo, the Managing Director of Areton Ltd as 2016. The Due to his age (subject born in 1980) at the time of the plasma aesthetic treatment, the subject did not present a considerable amount of excess skin on the upper eyelid area, therefore he would not have been a suitable candidate for any type of surgical intervention in the first place.
However, plasma eyelid tightening is deemed to be more suitable whenever there is little excess skin and the improvement sought is also only minor, like in this case.
The technique used, why and device settings.
- The technique used shown in this case study is the spray operation for localized skin tightening. As we will see, despite the fact that the spray operation can be more challenging it was put to the test in this case study not only to show its efficacy but also its safety too.
- The device used was the BeautyTeck, the setting was level 10 with 3 battery configuration. Relatively fast sweeping motions were applied.
If you have seen or studied voltaic plasma eyelid tightening treatments, you may have seen that the technique used is mostly the spot operation. The spot operation is extensively used for localized electrical plasma skin tightening because it is particularly easy to learn, perform and it leads to appreciable consistent results. Also as we have seen sometimes the two techniques can blend and become indistinguishable when the spots are applied very tightly together (please watch this video to see what we mean).
The main difference between the spot mode and the spray operation is that spray operation is generally more challenging to learn than the spot operation, and because of this, normally only very experienced aesthetic practitioners use it for localized skin tightening (in particular occasions only). Also, there is no clear advantage in using the spray operation in localized skin tightening using Voltaic Plasma.
However, in this specific case, the subject of the case study explicitly requested to perform the spray operation on him. This was also done to show how the spray operation can have the same safety and efficacy as the spot mode. This also demonstrates how, even a non medically qualified person, trying out this type of treatment for the first time can carry out what is supposedly the most difficult technique, the spray operation in plasma localized skin tightening, while still leading not only to the safety of the treatment but also good results.
While the spot operation is carried out by applying voltaic spots on the area to be treated, and the parameters to be varied are: only the spot duration, distance between the spots and power intensity of the device; on the other hand, the spray operation can be applied in several different ways by simply varying the speed of the sweeping motion. Furthermore, with the spray operation, it may not always be straightforward to appraise where you have already passed the voltaic spray, and where you have not. In other words, during the spray operation, it is in not very easy to determine what part has been already covered by the voltaic arc already and what has not. Therefore this makes the spray operation more challenging technique to be learned than the spot operation.
As seen in the video, in the case presented, the spray operation was carried out by performing relatively fast sweeping motions. These motions can be varied in speed achieving very different results.
Since, at the time of the aesthetic procedure, the right eyelid presented the loosest skin, the treatment focused more on the right eyelid. As you can see in the video, the length of treatment carried out on the left upper eyelid is less than half compared to the right upper eyelid.
About the people performing the treatment in the video.
Two different people had performed the treatment under the direction of the subject undergoing the treatment. Both people performing the procedure did not hold any formal medical qualification, nor did they have prior hands-on experience in performing these types of aesthetic treatment. They alternated the use of the device on both right and left eyelids.
In this case, the operators were both beginners who never performed this type of treatments. This shows how common sense and care can lead to a safe treatment as well as good results.
However, as discussed earlier, generally the spray operation is not recommended for eyelid tightening because it is difficult to learn compared to the spot operation which has been extensively shown to achieve consistently good results.
The numbing product used on the subject.
The subject hardly experienced any pain during the Plasma aesthetic treatment this was mainly due to the use of a professional customized numbing product. Some degree of discomfort was experienced when the treatment was performed close to the eyelashes, where the topical numbing product could not be applied properly. The type of numbing product used becomes effective within a few minutes from the application, without the need to apply occlusion. To learn more about this product please visit this link.
About the after-care carried out in this particular case.
The day following the procedure the subject rested until early afternoon without undertaking any professional activity. The subject was able to carry out all the normal working activities by late afternoon/evening of the day following the procedure.
The area was washed with Mild Neutral soap as normal, twice a day starting from the day following the treatment.
No antiseptics of any types were used by this particular subject. No ice packing was applied to soothe the area immediately after the treatment or during the healing. No soothing products or any creams were used at any point. Therefore the healing took place without the use of any products or drugs of any types.
It is also important to emphasize that the subject lived in parts of the world where the ultraviolet rays are relatively weak throughout the year (i.e. UK) and the treatments were carried out in the winter time. Therefore the subject decided not to use sunscreen at his own risk.
Please note that the use of total physical sunscreen after healing is mandatory in any case for at least three months after the last treatment and sun exposure should be purposely avoided even while using sun protection. If the area is exposed to the sun the sun too early even with the use of sunscreen hyper-pigmentation could result.
Explanation of how the area feels during the main healing process.
This is the description provided by the subject:
“The burning sensation hit me as soon as the effect of the numbing products faded.”
This means that there is an intense burning sensation on the area treated which takes over within 30 minutes to one hour immediately after the treatment.
“As this burning sensation begun the upper eyelids started to swell too. The swelling of the upper eyelids increased throughout the evening and night. The night after the treatment I had some trouble sleeping due to the burning sensation of the aesthetic procedure.”
“The first night, before going to sleep after the treatment, when I put water on to the area treated and the area become really painful. The intense pain lasted a few minutes after I applied water onto it but faded quickly.”
“The swelling of the upper eyelids peaked the morning after the treatment. I had trouble opening my eyes in the morning due to the swelling of the upper eyelids.”
“Slowly through the morning, the swelling started to subside slightly so I could open my eyes. The pain and discomfort started to subside throughout the day. By late afternoon I could open my eyes and in the evening I could carry out any normal activity.”
“The second night the pain went away and was replaced by only a slight feeling of discomfort, so I had a very good night sleep. The second day, in the morning, I could almost open my eyes fully and the pain had gone and so the burning sensation which started to be replaced an itchy sensation. I could carry out any normal activities all thought the day. The third night I slept well as usual and I could not almost I had any treatment done while in bed.”
Day 3. “I could open my eyes normally throughout the day. All swelling on the upper eyelid was gone. I had no more discomfort at all instead the itchy sensation increased. The scabs started to develop, so people could still notice I had some sort of treatment done on to my eyes.”
Normally the itchy sensation starts 3 days after the treatment and only lasts only 10 to 15 days after each treatment.
Day 4. “The itchy sensation continued as the scabs started to fall off on their own accord.”
Day 5. “No one could tell I had any treatment done apart from the few people who could notice some of my remaining scabs.”
Day 6. ” All scabs fell off on their own accord and nobody could notice I had any treatment done at all.”
Day 7 onwards. “The remain red and slightly itchy for a while. The itchy sensation lasted for two to three weeks approximately, however, it subsided over time.”
A brief explanation of the long-term skin recovery.
After the main healing process is over and the scabs have fallen off on their own accord, the area will still be red and generally slightly itchy. The treated area is subject to change over the period of 6 to 8 weeks. Also, the area feels tenderer than the surrounding skin for at least 4 to 6 weeks after the treatment. During this period, while applying creams and sun protection, a slightly stinging sensation may be felt, this is normal.
Several after pictures have been presented in order to allow a full comparison between the before and after the treatment. In this case, the after pictures were taken well over one year after the last plasma eyelid tightening treatment. This allows any redness due to the treatment to have completely subsided. Also, this subject underwent the removal of a benign lesion on the right eyelid a couple of months prior (in September 2016) to taking these “after” pictures in November 2016.
The results shown are a comparison between the pictures taken before the first eyelid tightening treatment in July 2014 and the pictures taken before the last plasma upper eyelid tightening treatment performed in November 2016.
Please note that we have published several pictures so that the comparison can be carried out also independently. Anyone is authorized to take the before and after pictures presented in this web-page and perform the same comparison presented here. The results will be the same or very similar despite the pictures used to compare the before and after side by side.
Pictures taken in July 2014
Andreas Before Pictures Taken in July 2014
Pictures taken in November 2016
Andreas After Pictures Taken in November 2016.