ArticleDermatology and therapy2024
Evaluation of a Novel Microfocused Ultrasound with Three-Dimensional Digital Imaging for Facial Tightening: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial.
Article in Dermatology and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the Use of High-Intensity Non-Focused Ultrasound Treatment to Improve Skin Laxity and Facial Wrinkles in Asian Patients.Lasers in surgery and medicine · 2026Trial
- Efficacy and safety of micro-focused ultrasound for middle and lower face rejuvenation: A prospective study.Lasers in medical science · 2026Trial
- Combined Novel Microfocused Ultrasound and Microneedle Fractional Radiofrequency System for Multilayered Facial Rejuvenation: A Prospective, Randomized, and Split-Face Study.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Trial
- Facial tightening using a novel vacuum-assisted microneedle fractional radiofrequency system: A prospective, randomized, split-face study.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2024Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe excellent efficacy is mitigated by the limited safety profile of microfocused ultrasound procedures.
objectiveWe sought to assess the safety and tightening efficacy of a novel microfocused ultrasound.
methodsThe randomized middle and lower face and submental region of the participants were treated with the novel device using the following transducers: M4.5, D4.5, M3.0, and D3.0. Improvement in paired comparison of pretreatment and posttreatment photographs, three-dimensional (3D) volumetric assessments, skin thickness measured by B-ultrasonography, and skin photoaging parameters were evaluated. Adverse events and patient satisfaction were also recorded.
resultsA total of 20 participants (20 female) were enrolled. Fourteen of 20 participants (70%) were judged to show clinically significant facial tightening during 3-month follow-up (P < 0.05). The mean volumetric change in the lower face, as quantitatively assessed after 3 months was -0.29 mL compared with +0.42 mL on the control side (P < 0.05). The VAS pain score was 3.00 ± 1.19 without any oral or intramuscular anesthesia.
conclusionsA small sample size, lack of clinical scales, and impersonalized treatment parameters. The novel microfocused ultrasound appears to be a safe and effective modality for lower-face tightening. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR 2200064666.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.