ORIGINAL PAPER
A randomised controlled trial on the effect of ultrasound cavitation on insulin resistance, abdominal skinfold thickness, and waist-to-hip ratio in women with central obesity
1
Faculty of Physical Therapy, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
2
Basic Science Department, Faculty of Physical Therapy, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
3
Faculty of Girls’ Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt
Submission date: 2025-03-21
Acceptance date: 2025-07-10
Online publication date: 2026-10-26
Corresponding author
Aya Saeed Shazly
Faculty of Physical Therapy, Cairo University, 7 Ahmed El Zayyat Street, Bein el Sarayat, Giza, Egypt
Faculty of Physical Therapy, Cairo University, 7 Ahmed El Zayyat Street, Bein el Sarayat, Giza, Egypt
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
This study aimed to evaluate the effects of ultrasound cavitation on insulin resistance, waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), and abdominal skinfold thickness in women with central obesity.
Methods:
A total of 52 women aged 25–40 years with the mean age of 32.9 ± 4.2 years with central obesity were randomly assigned to either an experimental group (ultrasound cavitation, aerobic exercise, and a low-calorie diet) or a control group (aerobic exercise and a low-calorie diet). Randomisation was computer-generated; outcome assessors were blinded. The intervention occurred twice weekly for 6 weeks. Outcomes were assessed pre- and post-treatment. Insulin resistance was measured using the Homeostatic Model Assessment for Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR), abdominal skinfold thickness with Lange callipers, and WHR with a non-elastic tape. Normality was confirmed via the Shapiro–Wilk test, and homoscedasticity was verified. Parametric tests including paired t-tests and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) were applied, with Bonferroni correction used for multiple comparisons.
Results:
The experimental group showed reductions of 23% in HOMA-IR (mean change: −0.64 ± 0.2), 7% in abdominal skinfold thickness (2.4 ± 0.5 mm), and 8% in waist-to-hip ratio (7.5 ± 1.2). In contrast, the control group demonstrated smaller reductions of 5% (0.13 ± 0.2), 0.5% (0.16 ± 0.1 mm), and 0.7% (0.63 ± 0.2), respectively. Between-group differences in all three obesity markers were statistically significant (p < 0.05), favouring the experimental group.
Conclusions:
Ultrasound cavitation, combined with exercise and dietary interventions, significantly improves insulin resistance and central obesity markers. This finding supports its use as a non-invasive metabolic intervention.
This study aimed to evaluate the effects of ultrasound cavitation on insulin resistance, waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), and abdominal skinfold thickness in women with central obesity.
Methods:
A total of 52 women aged 25–40 years with the mean age of 32.9 ± 4.2 years with central obesity were randomly assigned to either an experimental group (ultrasound cavitation, aerobic exercise, and a low-calorie diet) or a control group (aerobic exercise and a low-calorie diet). Randomisation was computer-generated; outcome assessors were blinded. The intervention occurred twice weekly for 6 weeks. Outcomes were assessed pre- and post-treatment. Insulin resistance was measured using the Homeostatic Model Assessment for Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR), abdominal skinfold thickness with Lange callipers, and WHR with a non-elastic tape. Normality was confirmed via the Shapiro–Wilk test, and homoscedasticity was verified. Parametric tests including paired t-tests and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) were applied, with Bonferroni correction used for multiple comparisons.
Results:
The experimental group showed reductions of 23% in HOMA-IR (mean change: −0.64 ± 0.2), 7% in abdominal skinfold thickness (2.4 ± 0.5 mm), and 8% in waist-to-hip ratio (7.5 ± 1.2). In contrast, the control group demonstrated smaller reductions of 5% (0.13 ± 0.2), 0.5% (0.16 ± 0.1 mm), and 0.7% (0.63 ± 0.2), respectively. Between-group differences in all three obesity markers were statistically significant (p < 0.05), favouring the experimental group.
Conclusions:
Ultrasound cavitation, combined with exercise and dietary interventions, significantly improves insulin resistance and central obesity markers. This finding supports its use as a non-invasive metabolic intervention.
REFERENCES (21)
1.
World Health Organization. Obesity and overweight fact sheet. World Health Organization; 2025. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/... (accessed 16 September 2026).
2.
Kelly T, Yang W, Chen C-S, Reynolds K, He J. Global burden of obesity in 2005 and projections to 2030. Int J Obes. 2008;32(9):1431–7; doi: 10.1038/ijo.2008.102.
3.
Ross R, Neeland IJ, Yamashita S, Shai I, Seidell J, Magni P, Santos RD, Arsenault B, Cuevas A, Hu FB, Griffin BA, Zambon A, Barter P, Fruchart J-C, Eckel RH, Matsuzawa Y, Després J-P. Waist circumference as a vital sign in clinical practice: a Consensus Statement from the IAS and ICCR Working Group on Visceral Obesity. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2020;16(3):177–89; doi: 10.1038/s41574-019-0310-7.
4.
John HSt, Doucet É, Power KA. Dietary pulses as a means to improve the gut microbiome, inflammation, and appetite control in obesity. Obes Rev. 2023;24(9):e13598; doi: 10.1111/obr.13598.
5.
Meng H, He F, Zou S, Yan X, Li Y, Li Z, She X, Yu X. The association between waist circumference and body mass index and mortality in obese patients in the ICU. Medicine. 2025;104(43):e45399; doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000045399.
6.
Khanmohammadi S, Karimi K, Sadri M, Ebrahimpur M, Payab M, Azadnajafabad S, Akbarpour S, Sharifi F, Rezaei N. Prevalence and determinants of general and abdominal obesity and overweight among older Iranian adults using 2016 and 2021 STEPS surveys. Sci Rep. 2025;15:40041; doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-23885-0.
7.
American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee. 2. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes: Standards of Care in Diabetes – 2024. Diabetes Care. 2024;47(Suppl 1):20–42; doi: 10.2337/dc24-S002.
8.
Yates KF, Sweat V, Yau PL, Turchiano MM, Convit A. Impact of metabolic syndrome on cognition and brain: a selected review of the literature. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2012;32(9):2060–7; doi: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.112.252759.
9.
American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee. 5. Facilitating Positive Health Behaviors and Well-being to Improve Health Outcomes: Standards of Care in Diabetes – 2024. Diabetes Care. 2024;47(Suppl 1):77–110; doi: 10.2337/dc24-S005.
10.
Wolska J, Hassan H. Non-invasive lipolysis modalities in aesthetic medicine. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2023;22(10):2635–49; doi: 10.1111/jocd.15929.
11.
Mulholland RS, Paul MD, Chalfoun C. Non-invasive body contouring with radiofrequency, ultrasound, cryolipolysis, and low-level laser therapy. Clin Plast Surg. 2011;38(3):503–20; doi: 10.1016/j.cps.2011.05.002.
12.
Alizadeh Z, Halabchi F, Mazaheri R, Abolhasani M, Tabesh M. Review of the mechanisms and effects of non-invasive body contouring devices on cellulite and subcutaneous fat. Int J Endocrinol Metab. 2016;14(4):e36727; doi: 10.5812/ijem.36727.
13.
Alizadeh Z, Halabchi F, Bodaghabadi Z, Zarandi MM, Abolhasani M, Seifi V, Khazaei R, Ghanadi S, Mazaheri R, Tabesh MR. Noninvasive body contouring technologies: an updated narrative review. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2024;48(4):659–79; doi: 10.1007/s00266-023-03647-x.
14.
Millar SR, Perry IJ, Van den Broeck J, Phillips CM. Optimal central obesity measurement site for assessing cardiometabolic and type 2 diabetes risk in middle-aged adults. PLOS ONE. 2015;10(6):e0129088; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0129088.
15.
Polak-Szczybyło E, Tabarkiewicz J. Influence of dietary and lifestyle factors on levels of inflammatory markers (IL-6, IFN- and TNF-) in obese subjects. Cent Eur J Immunol. 2024;49(1):19–25; doi: 10.5114/ceji.2024.138748.
16.
Ortiz-Alvarez L, Xu H, Ruiz-Campos S, Acosta F, Migueles J, Vilchez-Vargas R, Link A, Plaza-Díaz J, Gil A, Labayen I, Ruiz JR, Martinez-Tellez B. Higher physical activity levels are related to faecal microbiota diversity and composition in young adults. Biol Sport. 2025;42(1):123–35; doi: 10.5114/biolsport.2025.139850.
17.
Albajy M, Mihailescu D. Management of type 2 diabetes. Health Prob Civil. 2024;18(4):421–39; doi: 10.5114/hpc.2024.136467.
18.
Franco W, Kothare A, Ronan SJ, Grekin RC, McCalmont TH. Hyperthermic injury to adipocyte cells by selective heating of subcutaneous fat with a novel radiofrequency device: feasibility studies. Lasers Surg Med. 2010;42(5):361–70; doi: 10.1002/lsm.20925.
19.
Dierickx CC, Mazer J-M, Sand M, Koenig S, Arigon V. Safety, tolerance, and patient satisfaction with non-invasive cryolipolysis. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39(8):1209–16; doi: 10.1111/dsu.12238.
20.
Krueger N, Mai SV, Luebberding S, Sadick NS. Cryolipolysis for non-invasive body contouring: clinical efficacy and patient satisfaction. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2014;7:201–5; doi: 10.2147/CCID.S44371.
21.
Marchant ED, Singh E, Kureel S, Blair B, Kalenta H, Von Ruff ZD, Weldon KS, Lai Z, Sheetz MP, Rasmussen BB. Low-frequency ultrasound reverses insulin resistance and diabetes-induced changes in the muscle transcriptome in aged mice. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2025;328(6):E910; doi: 10.1152/ajpendo.00470.2024.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 2544-4395 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
