ReviewJournal of cosmetic dermatology2025
Microfocused Ultrasound in Regenerative Aesthetics: A Narrative Review on Mechanisms of Action and Clinical Outcomes.
Review in Journal of cosmetic dermatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Optimizing Collagen Biostimulator Choice in LATAM: Expert Consensus on Patient Selection, Ethnic Skin Phenotypes, and Accessibility.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Pooled it
- Short-term efficacy and safety of 5MHz fractional microneedle radiofrequency for facial rejuvenation: a prospective study.Annals of medicine · 2026Trial
- Correlation Study of Subjective Clinical Evaluation and Skin Biophysical Properties in Facial Skin among Young Korean Women; Pilot Study.Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI) · 2026Article
- The STIIM UP Protocol: Exploratory Evaluation of the Potential of Combined Calcium Hydroxyapatite, Hyaluronic Acid, and Botulinum Toxin A in Neck Rejuvenation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Aesthetic Considerations for Preventing and Managing GLP-1 Receptor Agonist-Related Facial Aging.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2026Article
- Use of High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound in the Periorbital Rejuvenation: A Systematic Review.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2026Review
- Microfocused Ultrasound With Visualization for Body Indications: A Global Expert Consensus on Best Practices for Treatment of the Abdomen and Arms.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Review
- MRI-Based Assessment of Microfocused Ultrasound-Induced Midface Lifting.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Article
- Exploratory Analysis of Age-Related Trends in Biostimulatory Response to Combined Calcium Hydroxylapatite-Carboxymethylcellulose and Microfocused Ultrasound With Visualization Treatments.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMicrofocused ultrasound with visualization (MFU-V) is widely used in aesthetic medicine for skin tightening and rejuvenation. However, its role in regenerative aesthetics and its precise mechanism of action are not fully understood.
objectiveThis narrative review aims to contextualize and articulate the mechanism of action of MFU-V, evaluate its role in regenerative aesthetics, and assess its effectiveness based on existing clinical, histological, and skin-mechanical studies.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was performed to collect and analyze studies on MFU's biological mechanisms, clinical outcomes, and impact on extracellular matrix (ECM) regeneration. The review integrates findings from clinical trials, histological analyses, and biomechanical assessments to provide a cohesive understanding of MFU-V's role in aesthetic medicine.
resultsMFU-V emits focused ultrasound energy that penetrates multiple skin layers and the superficial musculoaponeurotic system, creating localized thermal coagulation points. These points initiate biological responses that recruit fibroblasts and stimulate the production of new collagen and elastin fibers. Enhanced ECM protein synthesis leads to significant improvements in skin biomechanics and quality, reducing skin laxity and enhancing appearance. Clinical studies support these findings, showing improvements in skin firmness and texture following MFU-V treatment.
conclusionThrough analyzing the underlying biological mechanisms and the observable clinical outcomes, this narrative review sets the stage for a comprehensive understanding of the mechanism of action and role of MFU-V in regenerative aesthetics.
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.