truSculpt 3D vs. CoolSculpting
Non-surgical fat reduction is in, and that’s a good thing for consumers.
Of course, non-surgical and surgical methods both have their advantages and disadvantages, but with each passing year the technology for non-surgical methods seems to improve.
What Makes It Better?
First off, it should be noted that both truSculpt 3D and CoolSculpting use temperature as their fundamental method of reducing fat.
Fat is more vulnerable to changes in temperature than other types of tissue. Therefore with judicious use of heat or cold, we can kill fat cells without harming the other tissue.
Whereas CoolSculpting uses the cold, truSculpt 3D uses radiofrequency, which offers many advantages. Previously, patient discomfort from radiofrequency treatments stopped it from being as popular, but truSculpt 3D changes that.
Deeper and More Effective
The truSculpt 3D fat-reduction treatment uses a different frequency than previous technologies. Not only does this penetrate the skin more deeply, but its efficiency means it can kill fat without heating up the skin as much–compared to treatments like SculpSure.
Combine this with advanced temperature monitoring, and patients simply won’t experience the same discomfort as before.
The fact is, CoolSculpting has certain limitations as far as application and penetration when it comes to killing fat. For one, some applicators have difficulties grabbing onto smaller pockets of fat. For another, CoolSculpting works on fat near the surface, whereas truSculpt 3D can affect fat well below the skin.
Meanwhile, one other effect of the radiofrequency’s heating is to reduce laxity in the area and also improve skin tone.
CoolSculpting takes about 35 minutes to finish a treatment session, while truSculpt 3D takes less than 15 minutes.
Overall, truSculpt 3D offers many advantages over CoolSculpting.
Want to know more about body contouring and how truSculpt 3D works? Contact us today to schedule an appointment.