Device-based and surgical procedures compared.
Lasers, radiofrequency, ultrasound, peels and microneedling work through different mechanisms — with correspondingly different results, downtime and risks.
Light, current and sound.
These procedures deliver energy into the skin in a controlled way and trigger a repair response there. Depth of penetration and downtime differ considerably.
Laser treatments
From superficially ablative to deeply fractional. Ablative lasers show the strongest effects on photoageing and scarring — with the longest downtime and the highest risks.
Level of evidence: Strong
Radiofrequency
Heats deeper layers of the skin and stimulates collagen formation. Effects on firmness are usually moderate and require several sessions.
Level of evidence: Moderate
Focused ultrasound
Places points of heat at a defined depth. Results vary considerably between individuals; marketing expectations frequently exceed the study findings.
Level of evidence: Moderate
Controlled injury as a principle.
These procedures remove the uppermost layer of skin or injure it in a deliberately minimal way so that it renews itself.
Chemical peels
Superficial to medium depth depending on agent and concentration. Well documented for pigmentation disorders, acne scarring and skin appearance. Medium-depth peels belong in experienced hands.
Level of evidence: Moderate
Microneedling
Fine needle punctures stimulate wound healing. The strongest evidence is for acne scarring. Home devices do not reach the depth of professional treatments.
Level of evidence: Moderate
Facial treatments
Cosmetic treatments improve skin appearance and wellbeing in the short term. Evidence for a lasting change in skin structure is largely absent.
Level of evidence: Limited
Beyond the face.
For hair and body treatments, the gap between well-supported and poorly supported procedures is particularly wide.
Hair treatments
For hereditary hair loss, drug-based approaches have the strongest evidence. Injection and device treatments show inconsistent results at considerably higher cost.
Level of evidence: Moderate
Body treatments
Fat reduction procedures such as cryolipolysis show measurable but limited effects in specific areas. They are not a substitute for weight reduction.
Level of evidence: Moderate
This rating is a deliberately simplified orientation. It describes how robust the published evidence is for the main indication — not how well a treatment will work in an individual case. Details are given in the corresponding article.
Surgical procedures will follow.
This section is structured so that surgical procedures — such as facial surgery, breast surgery or body contouring — can later be added as their own areas without any change to the architecture of the site.
Note: in Germany, special advertising restrictions apply to surgical procedures under the Heilmittelwerbegesetz. Before-and-after depictions of surgical procedures are not permitted and are deliberately not used on this site.
Articles in this category
The first articles will appear here shortly.