Efficacy of microneedling versus fractional Er:YAG laser in facial rejuvenation.

Icon for Wiley Related Articles

Efficacy of microneedling versus fractional Er:YAG laser in facial rejuvenation.

J Cosmet Dermatol. 2020 Jun;19(6):1333-1340

Authors: Robati RM, Hamedani B, Namazi N, Niknejad N, Gheisari M

Abstract
BACKGROUND: Microneedling and fractional lasers have been used in facial rejuvenation with acceptable results and low adverse effects.
AIMS: To compare the efficacy of microneedling with fractional Er:YAG in facial skin rejuvenation.
PATIENTS/METHODS: This study was planned as a split-face clinical trial. Volunteers were randomly allocated to receive three monthly treatments on each side of the face, one with fractional Er:YAG laser and one with microneedling. The assessments included investigating clinical outcomes by two blinded dermatologists accompanied by measuring skin biophysical characteristics including cutaneous resonance running time (CRRT) and transepidermal water loss (TEWL). Moreover, possible adverse effects, downtime, and patients’ satisfaction were recorded at baseline, 1 month after each treatment, and 3 months after the last treatment session. The protocol was approved by the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT20160820029436N3).
RESULTS: Of the 32 selected volunteers, 24 subjects completed the study. The clinical assessment showed a significant improvement of the face appearance along with a significant reduction in dyschromia, and periorbital wrinkling (P-value < .05), with both procedures without any considerable difference between two methods. Moreover, the patients showed substantial satisfaction with both modalities with no statistically significant difference. Mean TEWL and CRRT values also decreased significantly in both groups with no considerable difference. The downtime was significantly shorter in the microneedling-treated side. There were no long-lasting or severe adverse effects after treatment with both methods.
CONCLUSION: Microneedling and fractional Er:YAG laser have comparable efficacy in facial rejuvenation, but little downtime of the former makes it preferable for many patients.

PMID: 32359018 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]

Read original article at PubMed >