Clinical Efficacy of Devices for Nonablative Photorejuvenation

Multicenter study of noninvasive radiofrequency for periorbital tissue tightening

“…There is a growing population seeking to minimize signs of aging without the risks or prolonged recovery of laser procedures [11,20] and there are numerous laser and nonlaser technologies being developed and studied to meet this need. This was the first large multicenter evaluation of a new nonablative RFTT device for cosmetic use.…”

“…Examples of these newer noninvasive technologies include CoolTouch infrared laser (1,320 nm), pulsed dye laser (585, 595 nm), intense pulsed light sources (585-1,100 nm), Nd:YAG (1,064 nm), Smoothbeam infrared laser (1,450 nm diode), ultrasound, and microdermabrasion [9,10]. While the incidence of adverse effects is unquestionably lower with nonablative techniques, the cosmetic improvement is subtle and/or inconsistent, and often requires serial treatments over a 6-to 12-month period [9][10][11][12][13].…”

Single-Pass Carbon Dioxide Laser Skin Resurfacing Combined With Cold-Air Cooling

“…Its efficacy, however, is currently the focus of heated debate among some authors. 4,10,22,23 In summary, the present method of using air cooling along with single-pass CO 2 laser skin resurfacing is an effective technique that can be ranked between multiple-pass ablative CO 2 or erbium:YAG laser skin resurfacing and subsurfacing in treating incipient and light perioral and periorbital wrinkles. Unlike conventional skin resurfacing and single-pass resurfacing with alternative forms of analgesics, our procedure clearly reduces intraoperative pain and postoperative adverse effects to an easily tolerated level.…”

Results of nonablative wrinkle reduction with a 1,450-nm diode laser: Difficulties in the assessment of “subtle changes”

“…Despite multiple reports claiming positive results for photorejuvenation type II [18], the efficacy of nonablative wrinkle reduction, however, is still discussed controversially [14,[19][20][21][22].…”

“…As Leffell demonstrated in a review of the literature on nonablative rejuvenation [20], consistent data on the efficacy of wrinkle reduction could not be provided, not at least because of the varying parameters of treatment and the scarcely comparable methods of evaluation. Most of the studies published on nonablative wrinkle reduction lack standardized photography, showing pre-and post-treatment results in a different angle of photograph or with different selective enlargement or different exposure times.…”