ArticleJournal of cosmetic dermatology2026
Enhancing the Efficacy of Poly-l-Lactic Acid Injections With Micro-Focused Ultrasound: An Evaluation of Combined Treatment and Optimal Sequence.
Article in Journal of cosmetic dermatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Next-Generation Minimally Invasive Anti-Aging Therapy: Incorporation of Resveratrol-Nicotinamide Cerosomes into PLGA Microneedles for Enhanced Skin Permeation.Pharmaceutics · 2026Article
- Enhancing the Efficacy of Poly-l-Lactic Acid Injections With Micro-Focused Ultrasound: An Evaluation of Combined Treatment and Optimal Sequence.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPoly-l-lactic acid (PLLA) and micro-focused ultrasound (MFU) are widely used for skin rejuvenation, each promoting collagen remodeling through distinct mechanisms. While combined use is common in practice, the optimal treatment sequence and safety profile remain unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the synergistic effects and ideal sequencing of PLLA and MFU in a preclinical model to guide clinical protocols.
methodsThree Bama miniature pigs were subjected to six treatment conditions on demarcated abdominal skin zones: (a) PLLA alone, (b) MFU alone, (c) MFU immediately before PLLA, (d) MFU 1 month before PLLA, (e) MFU 1 month after PLLA, and (f) untreated control. Löviselle PLLA was injected subcutaneously, while MFU was administered using the MFUS Pro system. Skin biopsies were collected at day 180. Histological (Masson's trichrome, Sirius Red, Verhoeff-Van Gieson, H&E), SEM, and quantitative image analyses were performed to assess dermal thickness, collagen subtype distribution, elastin regeneration, fat septa organization, and PLLA microsphere stability.
resultsPLLA alone increased dermal thickness by 23.7% and raised the type III/I collagen ratio to 0.79 ± 0.06 (p < 0.01). MFU alone mainly enhanced type I collagen (ratio: 0.39 ± 0.04) and improved fiber alignment. The combined treatment with MFU immediately before PLLA achieved the best outcomes: dermal thickness increased by 35.2%, and the type III/I collagen ratio reached 0.92 ± 0.05 (both p < 0.01). This group also showed denser elastin fibers, well-structured fat septa, and the most compact collagen morphology under SEM. MFU did not accelerate PLLA degradation or increase inflammation, with no significant difference in microsphere size or inflammatory infiltration compared to PLLA alone (p > 0.05).
conclusionSequential application of MFU immediately before PLLA enhances dermal remodeling more effectively than either treatment alone, without compromising PLLA microsphere stability. These findings support the clinical potential and safety of this combinatory approach, offering evidence-based guidance for optimizing skin rejuvenation protocols.
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.