SynthesisAnnals of plastic surgery2025
A Systematic Review of Helium Plasma Radiofrequency (Renuvion).
Synthesis 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.
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.
- Institutional Review Board Approval of Plastic Surgery Studies: Why It Matters.Annals of plastic surgery · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundHelium plasma radiofrequency (Renuvion, previously J-Plasma) is a new energy-based device that causes coagulation of the subcutaneous fat. The device has recently received 501(k) clearance by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for soft tissue contraction after liposuction. A systematic review has not been previously published.
methodsAn electronic search was undertaken to identify publications describing clinical experience with this technique. The US government clinical trials website and the FDA website were queried. The CMS Open Payments database was accessed to evaluate financial bias.
resultsTwenty-five publications contained patient data with sufficient information for tabulation. Treatment areas included the face, neck, female and male breasts, trunk, and extremities, usually in combination with liposuction. Studies typically reported subjective surgeon evaluations of photographs and surveys. None of the studies provided standardized photographs with measurements comparing Renuvion to traditional methods. Measurements on matched photographs of breasts treated with Renuvion did not substantiate the authors' claims. The findings of an ultrasound study of the abdominal fat layer were undermined by incorrect labeling of the tissue planes. Most studies were funded by the manufacturer and most investigators had financial conflicts. Few studies mentioned subcutaneous emphysema. Four case reports described patients who suffered helium-induced pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, pneumoperitoneum, and pneumomastia. Adverse events reported to the FDA included 15 life-threatening events and 3 fatalities. Full-thickness burns were frequently reported. The number and severity of the adverse events greatly exceeded those reported for radiofrequency and ultrasound devices. DISCUSSION: No evidence supports a claim of skin tightening beyond that which may be achieved using traditional or ultrasonic liposuction. Helium gas may permeate body cavities, with serious repercussions.
conclusionsMarketing has taken precedence over science and safety considerations. This technology introduces serious safety risks to patients, including death, with no proven compensatory benefit.
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.