{"title":"评估新型微针技术与传统针头在生物活化液抗衰老效果方面的性能和安全性:随机脸部/颈部分割研究。","authors":"Andreea Boca, Ferial Fanian, Riekie Smit, Alessio Redaelli, Ranesha Goorochurn, Hanane Issa, Natalia Sukmanskaya, Valérie Philippon, Roberto Dell' Avanzato","doi":"10.1111/jocd.16547","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Skin biorevitalization involves multiple intradermal injections to enhance skin quality, but precise dermal targeting can be challenging due to variations in skin thickness smaller, less painful needles with fewer skin reactions are attractive options.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>This study evaluates a new Micro-Needle device's performance and safety in comparison with the classic needle used in skin biorevitalization.</p><p><strong>Patients/methods: </strong>Subjects with facial and neck skin aging were enrolled. Safety outcomes, including immediate and local tolerability, were assessed. Performance outcomes measured skin radiance, wrinkles and photoaging grade, hydration, subepidermal low echogenic band, dermis thickness, and skin elasticity. Both subjects and investigators recorded Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Micro-Needle injections demonstrated superior performance compared to the classic needle, influenced by the specific skin zones and thickness. Micro-Needle was superior for skin wrinkles at D49 for periorbital zone and nasolabial folds by -14.5% (p = 0.01) and -15% (p = 0.004), respectively, and for neck by 9.6% (p = 0.0008). The Nanosoft device showed a faster improvement for skin hydration at D42 for the cheek zone (p = 0.04) and at D75 for the neck area (p = 0.01); and for skin radiance at D75 (p = 0.03) and at D120 (p = 0.0098). Ex vivo studies confirmed the Micro-Needle's accuracy in product placement in the dermis. Adverse events were milder with Micro-Needle and no serious adverse events occurred.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both needles significantly improved skin quality, but Micro-Needle enhanced the outcomes of skin biorevitalization procedures, particularly in terms of skin wrinkle reduction, elasticity, and overall skin hydration.</p>","PeriodicalId":15546,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the Performance and Safety of a New Micro-Needle Technology in Comparison With the Classic Needle on the Antiaging Effects of a Biorevitalizing Solution: A Randomized Split Face/Neck Study.\",\"authors\":\"Andreea Boca, Ferial Fanian, Riekie Smit, Alessio Redaelli, Ranesha Goorochurn, Hanane Issa, Natalia Sukmanskaya, Valérie Philippon, Roberto Dell' Avanzato\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jocd.16547\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Skin biorevitalization involves multiple intradermal injections to enhance skin quality, but precise dermal targeting can be challenging due to variations in skin thickness smaller, less painful needles with fewer skin reactions are attractive options.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>This study evaluates a new Micro-Needle device's performance and safety in comparison with the classic needle used in skin biorevitalization.</p><p><strong>Patients/methods: </strong>Subjects with facial and neck skin aging were enrolled. Safety outcomes, including immediate and local tolerability, were assessed. Performance outcomes measured skin radiance, wrinkles and photoaging grade, hydration, subepidermal low echogenic band, dermis thickness, and skin elasticity. Both subjects and investigators recorded Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Micro-Needle injections demonstrated superior performance compared to the classic needle, influenced by the specific skin zones and thickness. Micro-Needle was superior for skin wrinkles at D49 for periorbital zone and nasolabial folds by -14.5% (p = 0.01) and -15% (p = 0.004), respectively, and for neck by 9.6% (p = 0.0008). The Nanosoft device showed a faster improvement for skin hydration at D42 for the cheek zone (p = 0.04) and at D75 for the neck area (p = 0.01); and for skin radiance at D75 (p = 0.03) and at D120 (p = 0.0098). Ex vivo studies confirmed the Micro-Needle's accuracy in product placement in the dermis. Adverse events were milder with Micro-Needle and no serious adverse events occurred.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both needles significantly improved skin quality, but Micro-Needle enhanced the outcomes of skin biorevitalization procedures, particularly in terms of skin wrinkle reduction, elasticity, and overall skin hydration.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15546,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jocd.16547\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DERMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jocd.16547","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluation of the Performance and Safety of a New Micro-Needle Technology in Comparison With the Classic Needle on the Antiaging Effects of a Biorevitalizing Solution: A Randomized Split Face/Neck Study.
Background: Skin biorevitalization involves multiple intradermal injections to enhance skin quality, but precise dermal targeting can be challenging due to variations in skin thickness smaller, less painful needles with fewer skin reactions are attractive options.
Aims: This study evaluates a new Micro-Needle device's performance and safety in comparison with the classic needle used in skin biorevitalization.
Patients/methods: Subjects with facial and neck skin aging were enrolled. Safety outcomes, including immediate and local tolerability, were assessed. Performance outcomes measured skin radiance, wrinkles and photoaging grade, hydration, subepidermal low echogenic band, dermis thickness, and skin elasticity. Both subjects and investigators recorded Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale scores.
Results: Micro-Needle injections demonstrated superior performance compared to the classic needle, influenced by the specific skin zones and thickness. Micro-Needle was superior for skin wrinkles at D49 for periorbital zone and nasolabial folds by -14.5% (p = 0.01) and -15% (p = 0.004), respectively, and for neck by 9.6% (p = 0.0008). The Nanosoft device showed a faster improvement for skin hydration at D42 for the cheek zone (p = 0.04) and at D75 for the neck area (p = 0.01); and for skin radiance at D75 (p = 0.03) and at D120 (p = 0.0098). Ex vivo studies confirmed the Micro-Needle's accuracy in product placement in the dermis. Adverse events were milder with Micro-Needle and no serious adverse events occurred.
Conclusions: Both needles significantly improved skin quality, but Micro-Needle enhanced the outcomes of skin biorevitalization procedures, particularly in terms of skin wrinkle reduction, elasticity, and overall skin hydration.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology publishes high quality, peer-reviewed articles on all aspects of cosmetic dermatology with the aim to foster the highest standards of patient care in cosmetic dermatology. Published quarterly, the Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology facilitates continuing professional development and provides a forum for the exchange of scientific research and innovative techniques.
The scope of coverage includes, but will not be limited to: healthy skin; skin maintenance; ageing skin; photodamage and photoprotection; rejuvenation; biochemistry, endocrinology and neuroimmunology of healthy skin; imaging; skin measurement; quality of life; skin types; sensitive skin; rosacea and acne; sebum; sweat; fat; phlebology; hair conservation, restoration and removal; nails and nail surgery; pigment; psychological and medicolegal issues; retinoids; cosmetic chemistry; dermopharmacy; cosmeceuticals; toiletries; striae; cellulite; cosmetic dermatological surgery; blepharoplasty; liposuction; surgical complications; botulinum; fillers, peels and dermabrasion; local and tumescent anaesthesia; electrosurgery; lasers, including laser physics, laser research and safety, vascular lasers, pigment lasers, hair removal lasers, tattoo removal lasers, resurfacing lasers, dermal remodelling lasers and laser complications.