What is Radiofrequency Microneedling?
Radiofrequency Microneedling, also known as collagen induction therapy, is a minimally invasive aesthetic procedure used to improve the appearance of skin by stimulating the body’s natural healing process. During the procedure, a device with fine needles is used to create microscopic punctures on the skin‘s surface. Your skin is numbed with topical anaesthetic prior. Radiofrequency energy is then delivered through the needles to gently heat the underlying tissue, prompting the body to produce new collagen and elastin. The clinic uses the latest technology by PureSkin called PureDerma.
Benefits of Radiofrequency Microneedling
Radiofrequency Microneedling is a safe and effective treatment for a variety of skin concerns, including wrinkles, acne scars, large pores, sun damage, and uneven skin tone and texture. This treatment can also be used to reduce the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles, tighten loose skin, treat stretchmarks, improve the look of acne scars, and tighten and rejuvenate aging skin. The procedure is relatively quick and easy, with minimal downtime.
Unlike more invasive treatments, Radiofrequency Microneedling does not require any injections or general anesthesia, and it can be completed in less than an hour. The results of Radiofrequency Microneedling are visible almost immediately, with continued improvement over the next 6–12 months as the body produces more collagen and elastin. Studies have shown that this treatment can improve the appearance of wrinkles, acne scars, and other skin imperfections with minimal risk of side effects.
FAQ
Is this the same as Morpheus8?
Yes, Morpheus8 is a radiofrequency microneedling device. There are other which include PureDerma, Secret RF and Focus Dual. The clinic uses PureDerma device.
What are the difference between Morpheus8 and other Radiofrequency devices?
The devices can be monopolar,bipolar or multipolar. This is how radiofrequency is delivered to the skins tissues. Morpheus8 device uses bipolar technology. PureDerma uses multipolar technology. Multipolar technology is better tolerated and provide consistent results with the least downtime. PureDerma also uses vacuum technology to ensure precise delivery of treatment meaning faster recovery.
What is the difference between insulated and non- insulated radiofrequency microneedles?
Non-insulated microneedles deliver radiofrequency the entire length of the needle. Insulated needles only deliver radiofrequency at the microneedle tip. Non-insulated microneedles delivery enables faster results as more area covered. PureDerma device uses non-insulated microneedles. Morpheus8 uses inulated microneedles.
What is the best radiofrequency microneedling device to choose?
This is largely based on individual concerns you wish to treat. Your practitioner will be best able to advise. However, important factors to consider are your skin type, results, downtime and technology of the device. PureDerma is suitable for all skin types, well tolerated with minimal downtime and consistent impressive results to lift, firm and contour your face and body.
Take home message
Radiofrequency Microneedling is a safe and effective aesthetic treatment that can be used to improve the appearance of skin with minimal downtime or side effects. This treatment is relatively quick and easy, and the results are visible almost immediately, with continued improvement over the next 6–12 months as the body produces more collagen and elastin. If you’re looking for a safe and effective way to improve the look of wrinkles, acne scars, and other skin imperfections, radiofrequency Microneedling may be a good option for you.
References
References: Haedersdal, M., Togsverd–Bo, K., Wulf, H. C., & Togsverd, S. (2008). Histologic, ultrastructural, and clinical evaluation of a novel fractional radiofrequency device for skin rejuvenation. Lasers in Surgery and Medicine, 40(7), 524–532. https://doi.org/10.1002/lsm.20689 Saunders, S. M., & Glogau, R. G. (2007). Safety and efficacy of radiofrequency in skin rejuvenation. Seminars in Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery, 26(4), 242–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sder.2007.09.004