Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39540440›Full record

SynthesisAesthetic surgery journal2025

Microfocused Ultrasound With Visualization (MFU-V) Effectiveness and Safety: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Mojgan Amiri, Guardmond Ajasllari, Adea Llane, Gabriela Casabona, Tatjana Pavicic, Julia Sevi, Julieta Spada, Vasanop Vachiramon, Rossana Vasconcelos, Siew Tuck Wah and 2 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Aesthetic surgery journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Integrative Aesthetics: Shaping the Emerging Frontier of Modern Aesthetic Medicine.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Early Experience With Ultherapy Prime in Asia Pacific: A Pilot Case Series.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Mojgan Amiri
Guardmond AjasllariORCID 0009-0006-6427-6534
Adea Llane
Gabriela Casabona
Tatjana Pavicic
Julia Sevi
Julieta Spada
Vasanop Vachiramon
Rossana Vasconcelos
Siew Tuck Wah
Sabrina Guillen Fabi

Funding

Merz Aesthetics
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microfocused ultrasound with visualization (MFU-V) is an advanced, noninvasive cosmetic procedure widely performed for skin lifting and tightening. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the aesthetic effectiveness, patient satisfaction, skin quality, and safety profile of MFU-V treatment. A comprehensive search of 5 bibliographic databases up to 2023 was conducted. Pooled effect estimates with random effects models and corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Out of 4019 references, 42 studies were included. Meta-analysis showed 89% of patients (95% CI: 81%-94%; I2: 63%, n = 411) demonstrated some degree of global aesthetic improvement, as assessed by investigators. Similarly, 84% of patients (95% CI: 73%-91%; I2: 64%, n = 312) reported improvement following treatment. Satisfaction of any level was reported by 84% of patients (95% CI: 61%-94%; I²: 52%, n = 326), and 62% (95% CI: 37%-82%; I²: 3%, n = 172) when "neutral" as a response option was provided for patients. Skin quality (eg, wrinkles, texture) also improved. Patients reported a pooled mean pain score of 4.85 (95% CI: 4.35, 5.35; I2: 97%, n = 785), indicating moderate pain. Common adverse events included erythema, edema, swelling, bruising, and tenderness, all of which were generally mild to moderate in severity. Overall, our analysis demonstrated a notable increase in global aesthetic improvement and patient satisfaction following MFU-V treatment, accompanied by moderate pain and a generally favorable safety profile. However, the potential misclassification of neutral responses as positive may result in an overestimation of the treatment's efficacy. These findings highlight the need for well-designed trials to further explore MFU-V's clinical applications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 (THERAPEUTIC):

Indexed as

Cosmetic TechniquesRhytidoplastySkin AgingUltrasonic TherapyHumansPatient SatisfactionRejuvenationTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID39540440
PMCPMC11834976

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.