Microwave Treatment for Axillary Hyperhidrosis and Bromhidrosis

Botulinum toxin A versus microwave thermolysis for primary axillary hyperhidrosis: A randomized controlled trial

Background

Botulinum toxin A (BTX) and microwave thermolysis (MWT) represent 2 treatment modalities for axillary hyperhidrosis with different procedural and efficacy profiles.

Objective

To compare long-term outcomes following BTX vs MWT treatment of axillary hyperhidrosis.

Methods

A prospective, randomized, within-patient, controlled trial, treating axillary hyperhidrosis with contralateral BTX and MWT. Objective sweat measurement and patient-reported outcome measures for sweat and odor were collected at baseline, 6-month and 1-year follow-up (6M/1YFU). Hair reduction and patient treatment preference was also assessed.

Results

Sweat reduction was significant (all P <.01) for both interventions throughout the study. Objectively, sweat reduction was equal at 1-year FU (ΔP =.4282), but greater for BTX than MWT at 6-month FU (ΔP =.0053). Subjective sweat assessment presented comparable efficacy (6MFU: ΔP =.4142, 1YFU: ΔP =.1025). Odor reduction was significant (all P <.01) following both interventions, whereas only sustaining for MWT (6MFU: ΔP =.6826, 1YFU: ΔP =.0098). Long-term, hair reduction was visible after MWT, but not BTX (ΔP ≤.0001), and MWT was preferred by the majority of patients (76%).

Limitations

The intrinsic challenges in efficacy assessment.

Conclusion

This study exhibited BTX and MWT with similar sweat reduction, but distinguishable odor and hair reduction at 1-year FU. These findings support individualized treatment approaches for axillary hyperhidrosis based on patient-specific symptoms and preferences.

Impact of microwave thermolysis energy levels on patient-reported outcomes for axillary hyperhidrosis and osmidrosis

OBJECTIVE

Microwave thermolysis (MWT) is an emerging treatment for axillary hyperhidrosis reducing both sweat and odor. No prior studies have investigated and compared the different available energy settings of the MWT device. This study evaluated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for axillary hyperhidrosis and osmidrosis following MWT treatment with two different energy levels.

METHODS

Twenty adults with axillary hyperhidrosis and osmidrosis reported sweat on Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity scale (HDSS: 1-4) and odor on Odor scale (OS: 1-10), respectively, supplemented by overall Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI: 0-30). This was a prospective, randomized, patient-blinded and intraindividually controlled study with 3 months follow-up (FU). Randomization comprised MWT treatment of one axilla with a standard medium energy setting (energy level 3) and the contralateral axilla with a standard high energy setting (energy level 5).

RESULTS

At baseline, patients reported substantial sweat and odor, negatively affecting their quality of life. At 3 months FU, PROMs showed improved quality of life with significantly reduced odor and sweat. Overall DLQI was reduced from a median of 10 to 4, with a median 6.5-point reduction (p = 0.0002). HDSS was reduced from a median of 4 to 2 on both sides, with a median reduction of 1 for medium energy level and 2 points for high energy level (p = 0.014). OS was reduced from a median of 8 to 3 for both energy levels, with a median reduction of 3.5 and 4.5 points for the medium and high energy level, respectively (p = 0.017). Local skin reactions were mild and transient, but slightly more pronounced following treatment with the high energy level.

CONCLUSION

MWT effectively improved patients' quality of life, axillary sweat, and odor 3 months after on baseline treatment. Treatment with the high energy level presented a subtle but significant increase of efficacy based on PROMs for both sweat and odor. Patients were willing to accept a higher amount of temporary local skin reactions from a higher energy setting when experiencing greater odor and sweat reduction.