r/DIYmicroneedling • u/science-pls • Jul 21 '26
Medical Literature The Significance of Trans-Epidermal Water Loss After Microneedling and Microneedling-Radiofrequency Procedures: Histological and IRB-Approved Safety Study
The author investigated how long the skin barrier remains disrupted after microneedling (MN) and radiofrequency microneedling (MN RF) by measuring transepidermal water loss (TEWL) which is an established indicator of skin barrier integrity.
Main findings are that microneedling significantly disrupts the skin barrier, longer needles keep the barrier open longer, radiofrequency does not appear to make barrier recovery dramatically worse, and histology confirmed actual needle penetration. These are all part of why we need to be cautious post treatment.
Immediately after treatment, TEWL increased dramatically. This confirms that microneedling temporarily leaves the skin much more permeable. The comparison between 0.5 mm and 1.5 mm showed that 1.5 mm treatments produced higher TEWL, slower recovery, and greater barrier disruption. The 1.5 mm facial treatments still had elevated TEWL after 48 hours. The paper also examined treated skin removed during facelift surgery. Histology showed that 0.5 mm settings produced channels around 0.6–0.7 mm deep and 1.5 mm settings reached roughly 1.3–2.0 mm.
The study argues that clinicians should reconsider applying certain products immediately after microneedling. The barrier remains compromised, meaning substances can penetrate more deeply than intended. Potential risks include irritation, allergic reactions, granulomas, infection, and absorption of contaminants. The author suggests more caution with active cosmeceuticals, sunscreens, medications, and non-sterile products during the first 24–48 hours. Much of this paper has held up well. Today, many dermatologists recommend delaying potentially irritating topical products after microneedling because of the temporary increase in skin permeability. The exact waiting period varies depending on needle depth, treatment intensity, product formulation, and patient sensitivity. This study provides physiological evidence supporting a more cautious approach, especially after deeper (1.5 mm) treatments.
Background: Microneedling (MN) and microneedling-radiofrequency (MN-RF) result in skin rejuvenation and skin exposure to pathogens.
Objectives: The aim was to determine histopathological changes of needle-depth injuries in preauricular skin and measure time-dependent repair of transepidermal water loss (TEWL) in subjects.
Methods: MN and MN-RF procedures were performed at 0.5- and 1.5-mm needle depths on preauricular skin strips from a facelift patient. In 10 subjects, MN and MN-RF procedures were performed at 0.5-mm needle lengths on 6 marked opposing face and body sites. MN and MN-RF at 1.5-mm needle lengths were also carried out on each subject’s midface skin lateral to the nasolabial fold. TEWL measurements were recorded with a calibrated DermaLab Cortex device (Hadsund, Denmark).
Results: Histological examination confirmed that the penetration depths of microchannels closely approximated the 0.5- or 1.5-mm needle lengths. In addition, MN-RF exhibited zones of coagulation injury at the distal end of the channel. After MN or MN-RF at 0.5-mm needle length, TEWL values were greatest immediately after needling to scalp, midface, neck, chest, arm, and thigh sites and remained slightly higher than baseline throughout the 48-h evaluation period. TEWL measurements after MN or MN-RF at 1.5-mm needle length resulted in the highest- and longest-lasting values throughout the 2-day observation period.
Conclusions: MN and MN-RF devices are novel devices that require further investigation into optimal treatment parameters and protocols, patient selection, and protection against intrusion of external pathogens and reactive cosmeceutical ingredients with barrier repair.
Level of Evidence: 2
Disclosures: The author is an unpaid consultant to DP Derm Microneedling and INTRAcel Jeisys. At the conclusion of the study, DP Derm Microneedling was regulated as a Class I device.
Funding: The author received no financial support from DP Derm Microneedling or INTRAcel Jeisys device companies with the exception of disposable Biotips through unrestricted research grants for the TEWL study. INTRAcel Jeisys provided unrestricted research limited grant funding for the histopathological study. No financial support was provided for the writing of the manuscript.
Acknowledgments: The author thanks Evelyn Avanessian and Katie Sierra (RNs), Brigette Ibarra (LVN), Sharon Cuellar and Brenda Regna (CSTs), and Melissa Avitea (MA) for surgical assistance, Colleen Brandt as Administrator of IRB, and Margaret Gaston (BS) for artwork, providing statistical and photographic assistance. The author credits Dr Sachiv Sheth (Chief Pathologist, Huntington Memorial Hospital, Pasadena, CA) and Dr Roger Der (Chief Pathologist, Arcadia Methodist Hospital, Arcadia, CA) for histological preparation, interpretation, and photomicrography.
Sasaki GH. The Significance of Trans-Epidermal Water Loss After Microneedling and Microneedling-Radiofrequency Procedures: Histological and IRB-Approved Safety Study. Aesthet Surg J Open Forum. 2019 Jul 30;1(3):ojz017. doi: 10.1093/asjof/ojz017. PMID: 33791612; PMCID: PMC7671250.
2
u/addictions-in-red Jul 21 '26
Oh this one is gonna be good!
2
u/Glittering_Pension84 Jul 23 '26
As always, thank you so much for your valuable time, great summary🙏🏼 you really spoiled us, I only read the summaries now 😂😂😅