Device‐Induced Neocollagenesis: Profibrotic Response or True Neocollagenesis?

Abstract

Many light and radiofrequency-based rejuvenation devices have claimed to increase collagen production in the skin dermal tissue. However, there has not been enough scientific evidence to prove whether the result is just a profibrotic response or not. We aimed to find the optimal skin rejuvenation device that shows true neocollagenesis. We evaluated dermal collagen thickness and gene expression of procollagen type 1, 3, matrix metalloproteinase-3 (MMP-3), and transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) resulting from different energy-based devices in a rat model in vivo. The wound-healing response was evaluated histologically and by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) at immediate, 1st, 2nd, 4th, 8th, and 12th week after the initial procedure. At the 12th week, the most relevant changes of the dermal thickness were found in specimens after treatment with electrosurgical unit, fractional CO2 and 1064 nm Q-switched Nd:YAG. Procollagen 1 and 3 were also found to be the highest in electrosurgical unit, fractional CO2 , and microneedle radiofrequency. Dramatic changes of MMP-3 and TGF-β were remarkable at the early observation but went back to normal level at 12th week. The ratio of procollagen 1 and 3 was found to be the lowest with Q-Switched Nd:YAG 1064 nm and fractional CO2 . Electrosurgical unit resulted in most significant changes, but due to irreversible thermal damage and extremely high procollagen results it is considered as a profibrotic response. Fractional CO2 and Q-Switched Nd:YAG 1064 nm are applicable to face skin rejuvenation treatment considering thickening of dermal tissue and lower procollagen 1:3 ratio similar to the neocollagenesis purpose. Lasers Surg. Med. © 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.