PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: Effective skin rejuvenation treatments with RF technologies exist, with potential for personalized combination therapies based on individual factors. We compared microneedling and fractional RF laser effectiveness in rejuvenation, pore healing, and skin lightening.
UNASSIGNED: The research was a non-randomized clinical trial study conducted in 2021 at Ilam Skin Clinic, Ilam, western Iran on people applying for rejuvenation, skin lightening and improvement of open pores. People were voluntarily divided into two groups based on personal preferences (group A: microneedling, 25 people, group B: fractional RF, 25 people). After data collection, SPSS22 software was used for data analysis.
UNASSIGNED: The study revealed significant differences in the rates of low, moderate, and severe pain between the microneedling and fractional groups (10 vs. 16, 14 vs. 4, 1 vs. 5, respectively). Erythema showed no significant difference, with low, moderate, and severe cases reported in both groups. Swelling was lower in the microneedling group, but the difference was not significant. Bruising was similar in both groups, and staining was minimal. No herpes or infections were reported. The microneedling group showed better improvement in skin pores and skin lightening compared to the fractional group, with outcomes rated as good and excellent.
UNASSIGNED: Microneedling surpassed the fractional group in skin rejuvenation, lightening, and improved pores. Considering RF lasers are approximately three times more expensive than microneedling, the research indicates that choosing microneedling is not only more cost-effective but also a superior rejuvenation technique.
UNASSIGNED: The research was a non-randomized clinical trial study conducted in 2021 at Ilam Skin Clinic, Ilam, western Iran on people applying for rejuvenation, skin lightening and improvement of open pores. People were voluntarily divided into two groups based on personal preferences (group A: microneedling, 25 people, group B: fractional RF, 25 people). After data collection, SPSS22 software was used for data analysis.
UNASSIGNED: The study revealed significant differences in the rates of low, moderate, and severe pain between the microneedling and fractional groups (10 vs. 16, 14 vs. 4, 1 vs. 5, respectively). Erythema showed no significant difference, with low, moderate, and severe cases reported in both groups. Swelling was lower in the microneedling group, but the difference was not significant. Bruising was similar in both groups, and staining was minimal. No herpes or infections were reported. The microneedling group showed better improvement in skin pores and skin lightening compared to the fractional group, with outcomes rated as good and excellent.
UNASSIGNED: Microneedling surpassed the fractional group in skin rejuvenation, lightening, and improved pores. Considering RF lasers are approximately three times more expensive than microneedling, the research indicates that choosing microneedling is not only more cost-effective but also a superior rejuvenation technique.
摘要：
■使用射频技术进行有效的嫩肤治疗，具有基于个体因素的个性化联合疗法的潜力。我们比较了微针和分数射频激光在复兴中的有效性，毛孔愈合,和皮肤美白。
■这项研究是2021年在IlamSkinClinic进行的一项非随机临床试验研究，伊兰,伊朗西部的人申请复兴，美白皮肤和改善毛孔开放。人们根据个人喜好自愿分为两组（A组：微针，25人,B组:分数射频,25人）。收集数据后,采用SPSS22软件进行数据分析。
■研究显示，中度,微针组和分数组之间的剧烈疼痛(10vs.16，14vs.4，1vs.分别为5）。红斑无显著差异,低,中度,两组均报告严重病例。微针组肿胀较低，但差异不显著。两组的瘀伤相似，和染色是最小的。未报告疱疹或感染。与分数组相比，微针组在皮肤毛孔和皮肤美白方面表现出更好的改善，结果被评为良好和优秀。
■Microneedling在嫩肤方面超过了分数组，闪电,并改善毛孔。考虑到射频激光器的价格大约是微针的三倍，研究表明，选择微针不仅更具成本效益，而且是一种优越的复兴技术。
■这项研究是2021年在IlamSkinClinic进行的一项非随机临床试验研究，伊兰,伊朗西部的人申请复兴，美白皮肤和改善毛孔开放。人们根据个人喜好自愿分为两组（A组：微针，25人,B组:分数射频,25人）。收集数据后,采用SPSS22软件进行数据分析。
■研究显示，中度,微针组和分数组之间的剧烈疼痛(10vs.16，14vs.4，1vs.分别为5）。红斑无显著差异,低,中度,两组均报告严重病例。微针组肿胀较低，但差异不显著。两组的瘀伤相似，和染色是最小的。未报告疱疹或感染。与分数组相比，微针组在皮肤毛孔和皮肤美白方面表现出更好的改善，结果被评为良好和优秀。
■Microneedling在嫩肤方面超过了分数组，闪电,并改善毛孔。考虑到射频激光器的价格大约是微针的三倍，研究表明，选择微针不仅更具成本效益，而且是一种优越的复兴技术。
