ReviewRheumatology international2026
Consensus statement on mesotherapy for clinical and regulatory practice.
Review in Rheumatology international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Blood biomarkers of inflammation and brain-derived neurotrophic factor can not be used to assess the effectiveness of collagen mesotherapy in chronic cervical myofascial pain syndrome. A pilot single-blind randomized study.Rheumatology international · 2026Trial
- The role of injectable porcine type I collagen (Tropocollagen) in chronic musculoskeletal disorders.Rheumatology international · 2026Review
- Refractory Stasis Dermatitis Due to Chronic Venous Insufficiency With Psychosocial Worsening in 2 Septuagenarian Patients Treated With Hyaluronic Acid-Succinic Acid Intradermotherapy.The American journal of case reports · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Collagen Mesotherapy in the Course of Chronic Cervicocephalic Syndrome-A Retrospective Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
112 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mesotherapy is an evidence-based, minimally invasive technique used across multiple clinical fields, including pain medicine, sports medicine, rehabilitation, vascular diseases, dermatology, and aesthetic medicine. In recent years, international consensus recommendations have been developed to guide its safe and standardized application. To identify essential criteria for good clinical practice in mesotherapy and to promote their adoption among healthcare professionals and health authorities through a secondary analysis of the current recommendations issued by the Italian Society of Mesotherapy. A multidisciplinary panel of experts reviewed existing evidence-based recommendations and related scientific literature through a structured Delphi process. The analysis aimed to identify key elements that ensure safety, efficacy, and consistency in mesotherapy practice, and to distinguish evidence-supported interventions from outdated or inappropriate procedures. The expert panel formulated 49 evidence-based recommendations covering terminology, clinical use, and ethical aspects. Recommendations reached a high level of agreement (92.6%), confirming the robustness and clinical relevance of mesotherapy. The resulting standards clearly define what should and should not be done in modern mesotherapy practice. Adherence to evidence-based recommendations promotes transparency, patient safety, and professional accountability, while supporting regulatory recognition of mesotherapy as a scientifically grounded therapeutic option. These guidelines provide a framework for standardizing clinical practice, guiding education and research, and ensuring appropriate integration of mesotherapy into individualized treatment pathways. These evidence-based recommendations support harmonization of mesotherapy practice and its recognition by health authorities.
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.