ArticleArchives of dermatological research2025
Enduring outcomes of minimally ınvasive approaches for facial rejuvenation.
Article in Archives of dermatological research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Single-Center Retrospective Case Series of 33 Patients with Ophthalmic-Cerebral Embolic Stroke Following Cosmetic Facial Injection, 2017-2025.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Exploring the Therapeutic Potential of Botulinum Toxin in Treating Post-Acne Sequelae: A Critical Review.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2026Review
- Lidocaine Injection Provides Superior Pain Relief Compared to 10-Minute BLT Topical Numbing in Women Undergoing Cannula-Based Aesthetic Procedures.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2026Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Microneedle Fractional Radiofrequency Combined with Botulinum Toxin Type A for Periorbital Aging: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2026Article
- Lateral pretrichial subcutaneous brow lift with upper eyelid blepharoplasty.Scientific reports · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Facial rejuvenation procedures have gained popularity as individuals seek nonsurgical methods to address signs of aging. These procedures encompass a range of minimally invasive techniques, including botulinum toxin applications, dermal fillers, PRP, and thread lifting. This study aimed to assess patient satisfaction and evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of these minimal invasive facial rejuvenation procedures. Patients aged 18-65 who underwent facial rejuvenation at an Ear, Nose, and Throat Clinic were included. Procedures had botulinum toxin applications, dermal fillers, PRP, and PDO threads. Follow-up evaluations were conducted at 4-6 months for botulinum toxin and PRP and one year for other procedures. Visual analog scales and self-satisfaction measured beauty perception data after treatments. Botulinum toxin applications effectively reduced dynamic wrinkles, while dermal fillers provided volumetric support with varying longevity. PRP improved skin tone, brightness, moisture, and fine wrinkles. Patient satisfaction levels varied across procedures. Minimal invasive facial rejuvenation procedures offer a nonsurgical approach to address aging-related concerns. Botulinum toxin, dermal fillers, PRP, and PDO threads provide unique benefits, but their outcomes and satisfaction levels differ among patients. Understanding these variations is crucial for informed decision-making in facial rejuvenation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40249527What 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.