ArticleAesthetic surgery journal. Open forum2025
A Prospective Study on Helium-Based Plasma Radiofrequency for Minimally Invasive Breast Lift Scarless Mastopexy.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05665335 (A Post-Market Study of a Minimally Invasive Beast Lift Procedure Utilizing the Renuvion APR System), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
A Post-Market Study of a Minimally Invasive Beast Lift Procedure Utilizing the Renuvion APR System
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Radiofrequency and Helium Plasma Radiofrequency Alternatives to Mastopexy.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of Helium Plasma Radiofrequency (Renuvion).Annals of plastic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Review
- Helium Plasma Radiofrequency for Aesthetic Subdermal Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2026Review
- Breast Augmentation in Body Contouring Using Autologous Stem Cell-Enriched Fat Grafting: Fifteen-Year Clinical Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although mastopexy addresses breast ptosis, not all patients are willing or able to undergo surgery. Helium plasma radiofrequency (RF) is a minimally invasive alternative to traditional excisional breast lift surgery for mild-to-moderate breast ptosis. Objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of helium plasma RF for minimally invasive mastopexy. Methods: In this single-center prospective study, 15 patients were treated with helium plasma RF. Before and after photographs were assessed by blinded review 180 days postprocedure. Morphometric analysis and evaluations using investigator- and patient-assessed Global Aesthetic Improvement Scales (I-GAIS and P-GAIS, respectively) were carried out on posttreatment Days 30, 90, and 180. On Day 180, patients completed a satisfaction questionnaire and the Breast-Q scale. Results: At Day 180, the independent photographic review success rate was 73% (11/15). There was improvement in suprasternal notch to nipple distance (-1.2 ± 0.7 cm), midclavicular line to nipple distance (-0.9 ± 0.7 cm), and vertical distance from the suprasternal notch to the lowest point on the base (-1.5 ± 1.0 cm). Morphometric measurement appeared to improve over time, as did improvements in P-GAIS and I-GAIS. All patients (15/15) reported less sagging, higher appearance of breasts on the chest, improved nipple placement, more youthful-appearing breasts, and improved confidence and quality of life on the Breast-Q. There were no adverse events or pain reported during the procedure or follow-ups. Conclusions: This study suggests that helium plasma RF is a well-tolerated and effective minimally invasive option for patients seeking an alternative to traditional breast lift surgery. Level of Evidence 5 Therapeutic:
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.