ReviewAnnals of plastic surgery2025
Body Contouring With Electromagnetic Treatment Plus Radiofrequency: A Review.
Review in Annals of plastic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Helium Plasma Radiofrequency (Renuvion).Annals of plastic surgery · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundElectromagnetic treatments have recently been combined with radiofrequency to reduce the fat layer and simultaneously increase muscle thickness. Studies report treatment efficacy, using photographs and imaging methods.
methodsA literature review was conducted. Measurement data were tabulated. The EmSculpt Neo device (BTL Industries, Boston, MA) was used in all studies.
resultsSeven studies evaluated the fat thickness and muscle thickness using either ultrasound (1 study) or magnetic resonance imaging methods (6 studies). The abdomen was treated in 2 studies. The other studies treated the lateral thighs, flanks, buttocks, inner thighs, and upper arms. The mean reduction in fat thickness was 8.0 mm, and the mean increase in muscle thickness was 5.5 mm. All 7 studies were authored by BTL medical advisors. Measured changes were likely within the margin of error and of questionable clinical relevance. Few adverse events were reported. DISCUSSION: Photographs were frequently not standardized, showing changes in treated areas, but unexplained changes in nontreated areas as well. The magnetic resonance imaging scans were affected by differing levels of the axial slice. Measured changes were incremental and likely not indicative of a true treatment effect. The scientific basis for efficacy is tenuous, both for fat reduction and muscle hypertrophy.
conclusionsA scientific evaluation of the results fails to produce reliable evidence of a clinically meaningful result for this combination energy-based treatment. Financial conflict is a major factor. Liposuction remains the gold standard.
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.