{"title":"单极与双极分数微针射频面部年轻化的初步临床研究","authors":"Yidan Xu, Hao Wang, Yanjun Zhou, Huimiao Tang, Xiang Wen","doi":"10.1155/dth/3331924","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>Fractional microneedling radiofrequency (FMR) is a promising minimally invasive treatment for skin rejuvenation. This pilot study aims to investigate and compare the efficacy and safety of monopolar versus bipolar FMR in the treatment for facial rejuvenation.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>In this prospective, split-face pilot study, 20 female patients aged 35–55 years were enrolled. Participants underwent a single session with one side of the face receiving monopolar FMR and the other side receiving bipolar FMR randomly. Post-treatment assessments for biometric and aging characteristics using Corneometer, Tewameter, Cutometer, Antera 3D, and VISIA, as well as blinded investigators’ evaluation and patients’ assessed improvement, were conducted at 40 ± 7 days after the procedure. Adverse effects were monitored 3–6 days after treatment.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Nineteen participants completed this trial. 40 ± 7 days post-treatment, a significant increase in overall skin elasticity was noted on both sides of the face. No significant changes were observed in skin hydration, transepidermal water loss (TEWL), melanin, and erythema indices, and no differences were noted between the monopolar and bipolar groups. Antera 3D showed a significant reduction in average pore count, density, size, and volume in the bipolar group and in average pore density and volume in the monopolar group. Both modes of FMR significantly improved small textures (monopolar: 7.11 ± 1.45 to 6.58 ± 1.17, bipolar: 7.12 ± 1.23 to 6.55 ± 1.22; <i>p</i> < 0.05, <i>p</i> < 0.05). Significant improvements in small wrinkles and texture were also detected. Bipolar FMR showed superior results in pore count, size, and volume compared to monopolar FMR but was associated with significantly more pain. Patients reported overall satisfaction post-treatment, with no significant difference between the two sides. After the procedure, mild to moderate erythema and edema were noted, without any severe side effects. Scab formation occurred exclusively on the bipolar-treated side.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Monopolar and bipolar FMR are effective and safe for addressing aging with minimal adverse effects. Bipolar FMR offers better outcomes in terms of facial pores but may cause higher discomfort and longer recovery periods.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Trial Registration</h3>\n \n <p>Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2300069921</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11045,"journal":{"name":"Dermatologic Therapy","volume":"2025 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/dth/3331924","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preliminary Clinical Study of Monopolar Versus Bipolar Fractional Microneedling Radiofrequency for Facial Rejuvenation\",\"authors\":\"Yidan Xu, Hao Wang, Yanjun Zhou, Huimiao Tang, Xiang Wen\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/dth/3331924\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>Fractional microneedling radiofrequency (FMR) is a promising minimally invasive treatment for skin rejuvenation. This pilot study aims to investigate and compare the efficacy and safety of monopolar versus bipolar FMR in the treatment for facial rejuvenation.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>In this prospective, split-face pilot study, 20 female patients aged 35–55 years were enrolled. Participants underwent a single session with one side of the face receiving monopolar FMR and the other side receiving bipolar FMR randomly. Post-treatment assessments for biometric and aging characteristics using Corneometer, Tewameter, Cutometer, Antera 3D, and VISIA, as well as blinded investigators’ evaluation and patients’ assessed improvement, were conducted at 40 ± 7 days after the procedure. Adverse effects were monitored 3–6 days after treatment.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Nineteen participants completed this trial. 40 ± 7 days post-treatment, a significant increase in overall skin elasticity was noted on both sides of the face. No significant changes were observed in skin hydration, transepidermal water loss (TEWL), melanin, and erythema indices, and no differences were noted between the monopolar and bipolar groups. Antera 3D showed a significant reduction in average pore count, density, size, and volume in the bipolar group and in average pore density and volume in the monopolar group. Both modes of FMR significantly improved small textures (monopolar: 7.11 ± 1.45 to 6.58 ± 1.17, bipolar: 7.12 ± 1.23 to 6.55 ± 1.22; <i>p</i> < 0.05, <i>p</i> < 0.05). Significant improvements in small wrinkles and texture were also detected. Bipolar FMR showed superior results in pore count, size, and volume compared to monopolar FMR but was associated with significantly more pain. Patients reported overall satisfaction post-treatment, with no significant difference between the two sides. After the procedure, mild to moderate erythema and edema were noted, without any severe side effects. Scab formation occurred exclusively on the bipolar-treated side.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Monopolar and bipolar FMR are effective and safe for addressing aging with minimal adverse effects. Bipolar FMR offers better outcomes in terms of facial pores but may cause higher discomfort and longer recovery periods.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Trial Registration</h3>\\n \\n <p>Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2300069921</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11045,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dermatologic Therapy\",\"volume\":\"2025 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/dth/3331924\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dermatologic Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/dth/3331924\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DERMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dermatologic Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/dth/3331924","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的射频分形微针（FMR）是一种很有前途的微创皮肤再生治疗方法。本初步研究旨在调查和比较单极与双极FMR治疗面部年轻化的疗效和安全性。方法在这项前瞻性的裂脸先导研究中，纳入了20例年龄在35-55岁的女性患者。参与者随机接受一侧面部单极FMR和另一侧面部双极FMR的单次治疗。术后40±7天，采用Corneometer、Tewameter、Cutometer、Antera 3D和VISIA对治疗后的生物特征和衰老特征进行评估，并进行盲法研究者评估和患者改善评估。治疗后3 ~ 6天监测不良反应。结果19名受试者完成了试验。治疗后40±7天，面部两侧皮肤整体弹性显著增加。皮肤水合、经皮失水（TEWL）、黑色素和红斑指数均无显著变化，单极组和双极组之间无显著差异。Antera 3D显示双极组的平均孔数、密度、大小和体积显著降低，单极组的平均孔密度和体积显著降低。两种FMR模式都显著改善了小织构（单极：7.11±1.45至6.58±1.17，双极：7.12±1.23至6.55±1.22;p < 0.05, p < 0.05）。小皱纹和质地也有了显著改善。与单极FMR相比，双极FMR在孔数、大小和体积方面显示出更好的结果，但与明显更多的疼痛相关。治疗后患者总体满意度，双方无显著差异。手术后，轻度至中度红斑和水肿被注意到，没有任何严重的副作用。结痂只发生在双极处理的一侧。结论单极和双极FMR治疗衰老安全有效，不良反应小。双极FMR在面部毛孔方面提供了更好的结果，但可能会引起更高的不适和更长的恢复期。中国临床试验注册中心：ChiCTR2300069921
Preliminary Clinical Study of Monopolar Versus Bipolar Fractional Microneedling Radiofrequency for Facial Rejuvenation
Objective
Fractional microneedling radiofrequency (FMR) is a promising minimally invasive treatment for skin rejuvenation. This pilot study aims to investigate and compare the efficacy and safety of monopolar versus bipolar FMR in the treatment for facial rejuvenation.
Methods
In this prospective, split-face pilot study, 20 female patients aged 35–55 years were enrolled. Participants underwent a single session with one side of the face receiving monopolar FMR and the other side receiving bipolar FMR randomly. Post-treatment assessments for biometric and aging characteristics using Corneometer, Tewameter, Cutometer, Antera 3D, and VISIA, as well as blinded investigators’ evaluation and patients’ assessed improvement, were conducted at 40 ± 7 days after the procedure. Adverse effects were monitored 3–6 days after treatment.
Results
Nineteen participants completed this trial. 40 ± 7 days post-treatment, a significant increase in overall skin elasticity was noted on both sides of the face. No significant changes were observed in skin hydration, transepidermal water loss (TEWL), melanin, and erythema indices, and no differences were noted between the monopolar and bipolar groups. Antera 3D showed a significant reduction in average pore count, density, size, and volume in the bipolar group and in average pore density and volume in the monopolar group. Both modes of FMR significantly improved small textures (monopolar: 7.11 ± 1.45 to 6.58 ± 1.17, bipolar: 7.12 ± 1.23 to 6.55 ± 1.22; p < 0.05, p < 0.05). Significant improvements in small wrinkles and texture were also detected. Bipolar FMR showed superior results in pore count, size, and volume compared to monopolar FMR but was associated with significantly more pain. Patients reported overall satisfaction post-treatment, with no significant difference between the two sides. After the procedure, mild to moderate erythema and edema were noted, without any severe side effects. Scab formation occurred exclusively on the bipolar-treated side.
Conclusion
Monopolar and bipolar FMR are effective and safe for addressing aging with minimal adverse effects. Bipolar FMR offers better outcomes in terms of facial pores but may cause higher discomfort and longer recovery periods.
期刊介绍：
Dermatologic Therapy has been created to fill an important void in the dermatologic literature: the lack of a readily available source of up-to-date information on the treatment of specific cutaneous diseases and the practical application of specific treatment modalities. Each issue of the journal consists of a series of scholarly review articles written by leaders in dermatology in which they describe, in very specific terms, how they treat particular cutaneous diseases and how they use specific therapeutic agents. The information contained in each issue is so practical and detailed that the reader should be able to directly apply various treatment approaches to daily clinical situations. Because of the specific and practical nature of this publication, Dermatologic Therapy not only serves as a readily available resource for the day-to-day treatment of patients, but also as an evolving therapeutic textbook for the treatment of dermatologic diseases.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
