The following is a guest post from Apyx Medical Corporation, an ISAPS Gold Global Sponsor.

What Does the Largest Published Review of Renuvion 
(Helium Plasma RF) Mean for Aesthetic Surgeons?

As aesthetic surgeons, we often adopt new technologies long before a large body of evidence becomes available. Clinical experience, patient outcomes, and peer discussions naturally guide practice. Over time, however, individual studies begin to accumulate, creating an opportunity to step back and ask an important question: What does the totality of the evidence actually show?

A recent systematic review and meta-analysis by Shridharani, Sterodimas, and colleagues evaluated the published evidence supporting Renuvion (helium plasma radiofrequency RF) for aesthetic subdermal applications. By synthesizing data from 34 clinical studies involving more than 3,500 treated patients, the study represents the largest evidence review of helium plasma RF published to date.

One of the findings was the consistency of outcomes across different surgeons, countries, and practice settings. Despite differences in study design and treatment protocols, high levels of patient satisfaction and aesthetic improvement were consistently reported.

The pooled patient satisfaction rate reached 92%, with similarly favorable outcomes observed using both Investigator and Patient Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) assessments and Independent Photographic Review (IPR). Interestingly, patient satisfaction increased with longer follow-up, supporting what many surgeons observe in practice, that correction for skin laxity and contour refinement continue to evolve as collagen remodeling progresses over time.

Regarding safety, across all included studies, most reported adverse events were minor, expected, and self-limited. The overall pooled complication rates were 5% for standalone helium plasma RF procedures, 8% when combined with liposuction, and 15% in studies involving more extensive multimodal excisional surgery. Importantly, complication rates did not differ significantly between procedural categories, suggesting that the addition of helium plasma RF does not meaningfully increase procedural risk when used appropriately. The higher event rates observed in excisional procedures appeared to reflect the inherent risks of those operations rather than the energy device itself.

The review also explored whether outcomes varied according to study sponsorship or geographic region. No significant differences were identified between investigator-initiated and industry-sponsored studies for most efficacy or safety outcomes, providing reassurance that findings have been reproduced across diverse investigators and clinical environments.

For practicing surgeons, perhaps the greatest value of this review is that it consolidates a rapidly expanding body of literature into a single evidence-based perspective. Rather than relying on individual publications or anecdotal experience alone, we can now view Renuvion (helium plasma RF) through the lens of more than 3,500 treated patients from around the world.

As minimally invasive body contouring continues to evolve, high-quality evidence will remain essential to guiding clinical decision-making. This systematic review and meta-analysis represent an important step in that process and provide a stronger scientific foundation for the continued use and future investigation of Renuvion (helium plasma RF) in aesthetic surgery.