ArticleAesthetic surgery journal. Open forum2026
A Retrospective Analysis of the Clinical Response and Safety of Radiofrequency Microneedling Treatment in Managing Acne Vulgaris.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: Radiofrequency (RF) microneedling is increasingly used for acne management; however, real-world evidence for its clinical effects and safety remains limited. Objectives: The aim of this study was to describe the clinical response and safety of POTENZA RF microneedling (RFMN) for acne vulgaris in routine practice. Methods: The authors retrospectively analyzed data from adults treated at a tertiary dermatology center in Seoul, Republic of Korea. Adult patients (≥18 years) with clinically diagnosed acne vulgaris who received POTENZA RFMN treatment were included. The primary outcome was clinical improvement (assessed by the physician and/or reduction in lesion counts). Secondary outcomes included adverse events (AEs). Continuous variables were summarized per distribution. Results: The cohort included 50 patients (median age, 24 years; 60% male) with predominantly Fitzpatrick skin types III. All procedures used bipolar RF (50% medium, 50% high); no boosters. Median sessions were 3. Clinical improvement occurred in 94% (47/50). Lesion counts decreased from 45 to 18.5 ( Conclusions: In real-world practice, POTENZA RFMN was associated with high clinical improvement, substantial lesion reduction, excellent tolerability, and universal patient-reported benefits. These findings support its pragmatic use for acne in patients with Fitzpatrick skin types III and IV and warrant confirmation in prospective controlled studies. Level of Evidence: 4 (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.