A split-face comparison of a fractional microneedle radiofrequency device and fractional carbon dioxide laser therapy in acne patients

Jung U. Shin, Soo Hyun Lee, Jin Young Jung, JuHee Lee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: A number of lasers and light-based devices have been reported as promising treatment options for acne vulgaris. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of fractional microneedle radiofrequency (MRF) device treatment compared to CO 2 fractional laser system (FS) for the treatment of acne vulgaris. Methods: Twenty healthy subjects underwent full-face treatment for acne vulgaris with CO 2 FS and MRF device. For each subject, two passes of CO 2 FS with a pulse energy setting of 80 mJ and a density of 100 spots/cm 2 were used on one side, and two passes of MRF device with a intensity of 8, density of 25 MTZ/cm 2 , and a depth of 1.5-2.5 mm were used on the other. Patients were evaluated 3 months postoperatively and were also photographed. Results: Most of the patients improved based on clinical and photographic assessments 3 months after the treatment. No significant differences in physician-measured parameters, patient ratings, or intraoperative pain ratings were found, although downtime was significantly longer for the CO 2 FS treated side. Conclusions: MRF device and CO 2 FS can be used for acne vulgaris patients and MRF device is more convenient than CO 2 FS because of its short downtime.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)212-217
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Cosmetic and Laser Therapy
Volume14
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2012 Oct 1

Fingerprint

Gas Lasers
Acne Vulgaris
Laser Therapy
Carbon Monoxide
Lasers
Equipment and Supplies
Therapeutics
Healthy Volunteers
Physicians
Safety
Light
Pain

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery
  • Dermatology

Cite this

@article{b01e7af5d2fd4a7c8ed5c97d09964acc,
title = "A split-face comparison of a fractional microneedle radiofrequency device and fractional carbon dioxide laser therapy in acne patients",
abstract = "Background: A number of lasers and light-based devices have been reported as promising treatment options for acne vulgaris. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of fractional microneedle radiofrequency (MRF) device treatment compared to CO 2 fractional laser system (FS) for the treatment of acne vulgaris. Methods: Twenty healthy subjects underwent full-face treatment for acne vulgaris with CO 2 FS and MRF device. For each subject, two passes of CO 2 FS with a pulse energy setting of 80 mJ and a density of 100 spots/cm 2 were used on one side, and two passes of MRF device with a intensity of 8, density of 25 MTZ/cm 2 , and a depth of 1.5-2.5 mm were used on the other. Patients were evaluated 3 months postoperatively and were also photographed. Results: Most of the patients improved based on clinical and photographic assessments 3 months after the treatment. No significant differences in physician-measured parameters, patient ratings, or intraoperative pain ratings were found, although downtime was significantly longer for the CO 2 FS treated side. Conclusions: MRF device and CO 2 FS can be used for acne vulgaris patients and MRF device is more convenient than CO 2 FS because of its short downtime.",
author = "Shin, {Jung U.} and Lee, {Soo Hyun} and Jung, {Jin Young} and JuHee Lee",
year = "2012",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3109/14764172.2012.720023",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "212--217",
journal = "Journal of Cosmetic and Laser Therapy",
issn = "1476-4172",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",
number = "5",

}

A split-face comparison of a fractional microneedle radiofrequency device and fractional carbon dioxide laser therapy in acne patients. / Shin, Jung U.; Lee, Soo Hyun; Jung, Jin Young; Lee, JuHee.

In: Journal of Cosmetic and Laser Therapy, Vol. 14, No. 5, 01.10.2012, p. 212-217.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A split-face comparison of a fractional microneedle radiofrequency device and fractional carbon dioxide laser therapy in acne patients

AU - Shin, Jung U.

AU - Lee, Soo Hyun

AU - Jung, Jin Young

AU - Lee, JuHee

PY - 2012/10/1

Y1 - 2012/10/1

N2 - Background: A number of lasers and light-based devices have been reported as promising treatment options for acne vulgaris. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of fractional microneedle radiofrequency (MRF) device treatment compared to CO 2 fractional laser system (FS) for the treatment of acne vulgaris. Methods: Twenty healthy subjects underwent full-face treatment for acne vulgaris with CO 2 FS and MRF device. For each subject, two passes of CO 2 FS with a pulse energy setting of 80 mJ and a density of 100 spots/cm 2 were used on one side, and two passes of MRF device with a intensity of 8, density of 25 MTZ/cm 2 , and a depth of 1.5-2.5 mm were used on the other. Patients were evaluated 3 months postoperatively and were also photographed. Results: Most of the patients improved based on clinical and photographic assessments 3 months after the treatment. No significant differences in physician-measured parameters, patient ratings, or intraoperative pain ratings were found, although downtime was significantly longer for the CO 2 FS treated side. Conclusions: MRF device and CO 2 FS can be used for acne vulgaris patients and MRF device is more convenient than CO 2 FS because of its short downtime.

AB - Background: A number of lasers and light-based devices have been reported as promising treatment options for acne vulgaris. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of fractional microneedle radiofrequency (MRF) device treatment compared to CO 2 fractional laser system (FS) for the treatment of acne vulgaris. Methods: Twenty healthy subjects underwent full-face treatment for acne vulgaris with CO 2 FS and MRF device. For each subject, two passes of CO 2 FS with a pulse energy setting of 80 mJ and a density of 100 spots/cm 2 were used on one side, and two passes of MRF device with a intensity of 8, density of 25 MTZ/cm 2 , and a depth of 1.5-2.5 mm were used on the other. Patients were evaluated 3 months postoperatively and were also photographed. Results: Most of the patients improved based on clinical and photographic assessments 3 months after the treatment. No significant differences in physician-measured parameters, patient ratings, or intraoperative pain ratings were found, although downtime was significantly longer for the CO 2 FS treated side. Conclusions: MRF device and CO 2 FS can be used for acne vulgaris patients and MRF device is more convenient than CO 2 FS because of its short downtime.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84866844942&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84866844942&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3109/14764172.2012.720023

DO - 10.3109/14764172.2012.720023

M3 - Article

C2 - 23016530

AN - SCOPUS:84866844942

VL - 14

SP - 212

EP - 217

JO - Journal of Cosmetic and Laser Therapy

JF - Journal of Cosmetic and Laser Therapy

SN - 1476-4172

IS - 5

ER -