Regeneration in Aesthetic Medicine: Mechanisms, Evidence, and Clinical Boundaries.

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

• Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
• Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
• Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
• Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
• Emerging · Emerging topic under active research

Abstract (original English)

Background Regeneration has emerged as a key concept in aesthetic medicine as the field evolves from predominantly volumetric correction toward biologically oriented strategies aimed at improving tissue quality, function, and long-term structural integrity. However, the widespread use of the term "regenerative" has often been used without biological precision, leading to conceptual overlap with repair, remodeling, and biostimulation. A critical evaluation of the biological basis and clinical evidence supporting regenerative claims is needed. Objective To critically synthesize current biological, translational, and clinical evidence related to skin regeneration in aesthetic medicine, with emphasis on extracellular matrix remodeling, immune modulation, mechanotransduction, and dermal-hypodermal integration, and to contextualize the regenerative potential and limitations of commonly used biomaterials. Methods A narrative review was conducted based on experimental studies, translational research, narrative and systematic reviews, and clinical investigations cited in the reference set. Evidence was qualitatively analyzed focusing on mechanisms of action, tissue-level interactions, immune responses, extracellular matrix dynamics, involvement of subcutaneous adipose compartments, and durability of clinical outcomes. Results Cutaneous regeneration is a multilevel functional process dri

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.