Trial reportLasers in medical science2024
Efficacy and safety of a home-use handheld multi-energy-based device for skin rejuvenation: clinical, ex vivo, and histological studies.
Trial report in Lasers in medical science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and Safety of At-Home Light-Emitting Diode Photobiomodulation for Facial Rejuvenation: A Systematic Review.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Alongside increases in the average lifespan and a growing interest in anti-aging remedies, the demand for at-home skincare devices is rapidly expanding in the cosmetic market. This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of a novel home-use handheld multi-energy-based device for skin rejuvenation that simultaneously emits low level light, low-dose radiofrequency, low-energy microcurrent, and low-intensity ultrasonic wave. This prospective, randomized, split-face clinical trial enrolled 36 healthy Korean women. After 8 weeks of device use, parameters associated with skin aging were assessed. Additionally, a preliminary ex vivo study and skin biopsy following device use were performed to confirm safety and efficiency of the device. Parameters associated with skin aging including skin hydration, elasticity, roughness, skin pore size, and eye wrinkle volume showed significant improvements after 8 weeks of the device use, relative to baseline measurements and the control side. No adverse effects were observed during the follow-up period. Results of ex vivo and in vivo skin tissue studies correlated with clinical findings, which showed an increase in the expression of type 1 collagen and a decrease in the expression of matrix metalloproteinase-1, which is related to the skin aging phenotype. The expression of loricrin and involucrin, major components of the epidermal skin barrier, also increased after the use of the device. Multi-energy-based device is effective for skin rejuvenation and tolerable, without any considerable adverse effects.
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.