Why Potenza RF Improves Pores and Acne Scars — Explained with Research Data
"Pores and acne scars disappear with needles and electrical energy — this has been proven in research papers."
One of the most talked-about treatments in aesthetic medicine today is "Potenza (Fractional Microneedle RF: MNRF)". Why does it deliver such remarkable results for acne scars, enlarged pores, and fine lines and Sagging (skin laxity) caused by aging? In this article, rather than relying on images or word-of-mouth reviews, wecite actual numerical data and evidence from medical research papersthoroughly, and explain the mechanism and reality behind Potenza's dramatic skin-rejuvenation effects.
What is Potenza — the ultimate combination of RF and microneedling
"The decisive difference between Potenza and other devices actually lies at the needle tip"
Microneedling (MN), represented by devices like Dermapen, is a treatment that creates tiny physical injuries to the skin with ultra-fine needles and leverages the wound-healing process to stimulate collagen production. However, Potenza (MNRF) is not merely needle therapy. It has a groundbreaking mechanism: the moment the needle reaches the dermal layer, RF (radiofrequency) energy is directly emitted from its tip.
In a study by Hwang et al. (2025), the effects of "microneedles alone (MN)" and "microneedle RF (MNRF)" on aged skin were compared[1, 2]. The results showed that MNRF treatment not only reduced the number of "senescent fibroblasts" — the root cause of aging — but also promoted the proliferation of "non-senescent fibroblasts" that produce new collagen and elastin, demonstrating adual effectof the treatment[1].
The change that RF thermal energy brings to skin is dramatic. When heat is applied directly to the deep dermis, it creates both immediate tightening from heat-induced contraction and long-term tissue remodeling. According to histological analysis by Hwang et al. (2025), the skin treated with MNRF showed clearly elevated levels of collagen and elastin in the dermal layer compared to skin treated with needle therapy alone (MN)[1]. Through the synergistic effect of physical stimulation from the needle and thermal energy from RF, Potenza delivers fundamental skin rejuvenation from the foundation up.
Potenza for Symptomatic Efficacy — Remarkable Improvement Rates Demonstrated by Published Data
What skin concerns can Potenza treat effectively? Here, we explain specific effects using actual numerical values from published data demonstrated in clinical trials (RCTs) and similar studies.
Efficacy for Acne Scars (Atrophic Scars)
Deeply indented acne scars (atrophic scars) are extremely difficult to improve through self-directed skincare. According to a systematic review by Sitohang et al. (2021), microneedling and MNRF consistently demonstrate high efficacy against atrophic acne scars [3, 4]. Clear improvement has been confirmed in multiple clinical trials using the "Goodman & Baron Qualitative and Quantitative Classification" and "ECCA Scale" for measuring acne scar severity [5].
In particular, a randomized controlled trial by An et al. (2019) reported that treatment using fractional microneedle RF with depths of 0.8–1.5 mm significantly improved the smoothness of acne scars and reduced scar size itself [6]. This is because the heat from RF destroys abnormal collagen that has hardened at the base of acne scars and powerfully promotes reconstruction into new normal tissue.
Data on Pore Refinement and Sebum Suppression
Potenza also demonstrates remarkable efficacy against enlarged pores and excess sebum production. Research by Cho et al. (2012) showed that fractional microneedle RF treatment is effective in improving enlarged facial pores [7]. The physical stimulation from the needle combined with RF heat targets the sebaceous glands, suppressing excess sebum production and achieving a tightening effect on enlarged pores.
Effects on fine lines and Sagging (skin laxity) (% data of collagen production)
The cause of fine lines and Sagging (skin laxity) associated with aging is the decrease of collagen and elastin in the dermis. In a study by Wamsley et al. (2021)[8], non-invasive measurement using ultrasound imaging demonstrated that dermal density increased dramatically from 1 month after treatment (day 120). Furthermore, at 3 months (day 180),facial dermal density increased by 101.86% from baseline (P<0.001)Moreover, epidermis density also increased by 19.28%, an astounding real-world value that has been reported[8]. Regarding facial elasticity, a 28.2% increase from baseline was confirmed[9].
Additionally, in the histological quantitative evaluation of microneedling by El-Domyati et al. (2015), at 3 months post-treatment, Type I collagen supporting skin firmness increased significantly from 58.1±5.1% to 69.9±5.4% (P=0.01), and Type III collagen maintaining flexibility increased from 55.6±4.7% to 67.8±6.1% (P=0.01)Type I collagen supporting skin firmness increased significantly from 58.1±5.1% to 69.9±5.4% (P=0.01), and Type III collagen maintaining flexibility increased from 55.6±4.7% to 67.8±6.1% (P=0.01)has been demonstrated[10, 11]. In a study by Hwang et al. (2025), the wrinkle value (R1: skin roughness) at 5 months after MNRF treatment showed statistically significant improvement from 1.45±0.23 to 1.19±0.14 (p=0.042)[12].
Downtime reality—answering "How many days does redness last?" with data
When undergoing aesthetic medical treatment, the most concerning factor is "downtime (recovery period)". Many people worry: "Will intense redness and swelling persist for weeks?"
In the clinical data from Hwang et al. (2025), the Erythema Index (a numerical value indicating skin redness) was tracked long-term. The baseline before treatment was 227.96±76.42, whereas at 5 months post-treatment it was 227.12±66.87,showing no statistically significant difference at all (p=0.538)[13]. This strongly supports the finding that redness from Potenza is merely temporary and does not cause long-term pigmentation or persistent facial redness.
Additionally, in a review by Sitohang et al. (2021), while temporary mild pain, erythema, and edema (swelling) may occur after microneedling treatment,no serious adverse effects have been reportedas concluded[3, 14]. While downtime varies individually depending on output level and needle depth, it generally settles to a level concealable with makeup within a few days. To further reduce downtime, thorough moisturization immediately after treatment and proper aftercare such as sun protection (SPF 30 or higher sunscreen) are critically important[15, 16].
【Comparative Paper Data】Device Selection Guide by Symptom
Potenza (MNRF)
Acne scarring
◎ Highly effective for atrophic scarring
Pores and sebum
◎ Direct approach to sebaceous glands
Sagging (skin laxity) and fine lines
◎ Dermal density +101.86% (literature value)
Downtime
△ Several days to 1 week
Hyperpigmentation risk
Low (literature: no significant difference)
Fractional laser
Acne scarring
◎ Effective for deep crater-type scars
Pores and sebum
○ Effective
Sagging (skin laxity) and fine lines
◎ High collagen production
Downtime
× 1–2 weeks or longer
Hyperpigmentation risk
High (risk of PIH)
Microneedling (MN alone)
Acne scarring
○ Effective for mild to moderate cases
Pores and sebum
△ Limited effectiveness
Sagging (skin laxity) and fine lines
○ Collagen induction present
Downtime
○ Approximately 1–3 days
Hyperpigmentation risk
Low
※ Created based on data from Sitohang et al. (2021) and Hwang et al. (2025)
Potenza vs. Fractional Laser vs. Microneedling—Which is right for you?
"Even with the same acne scar treatment, recovery time differs significantly between fractional laser and Potenza"
When considering acne scar treatment, you will likely be unsure which to choose: Potenza, fractional laser (CO2 or Er:YAG, etc.), or microneedling (standard microneedling). The comparison based on published data is as follows:
In the systematic review by Sitohang et al. (2021), microneedling (MN)-based treatments showed superior results compared to 1550nm Er:Glass fractional laser, Er:YAG laser, and even 100% TCA Cross (chemicalPeeling) compared to,「fewer adverse events and shorter downtime」has been clearly reported [14].
Fractional laser has powerful effects, but causes strong thermal damage to the epidermis, presenting challenges such as risk of post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation (PIH) and long downtime. In contrast, dermapenning (MN) is convenient but has limitations in tightening effects since it lacks thermal energy. Potenza, on the other hand, delivers RF energy after the needle penetrates deep into the skin (dermis), allowing minimal damage to the epidermis while delivering powerful heat to the dermis. In other words,"the best of both worlds"—combining "high efficacy comparable to laser" and "short downtime like dermapenning"treatment approach.
How many sessions are needed before results appear? — Guidelines for treatment frequency and intervals
To the question "Will one treatment completely cure it?", an answer must be provided from the perspective of the skin regeneration cycle. Collagen remodeling is an extremely slow process [17].
In the clinical protocol by Hwang et al. (2025),"four consecutive MNRF treatments spaced 4 weeks apart"were performed, achieving high clinical and histological improvement [18]. Furthermore, in Singh et al.'s research cited in Sitohang et al.'s review,"To achieve significant improvement, a minimum of 4–6 sessions is necessary,"is recommended (with intervals of 2–4 weeks) [17].
- Can you see results from just one treatment?:Many patients notice initial effects such as improved skin firmness and better makeup application (improved skin texture) after the 1st or 2nd treatment. However, for symptoms requiring dermal remodeling—such as acne scar indentations or deep wrinkles—one treatment alone is not sufficient.
- Maintenance therapy schedule:According to reports by Fabbrocini et al., because new collagen deposition progresses slowly, it can take 8–12 months after treatment before optimal results become visible [17]. Therefore, the most effective approach is to receive 4–6 sessions at 4-week intervals as initial treatment, then perform maintenance therapy at intervals of several months based on skin condition.
"I wonder if this is right for me?"
Book a free consultation
We do not engage in high-pressure sales. Please feel free to reach out.
Summary of this article
- Synergistic effect of needling + RF:Potenza delivers RF thermal energy to the dermis in addition to the physical needle stimulus, reducing aged cells and dramatically promoting collagen and elastin production [1].
- Proven dramatic improvement rate:Treatment increases facial dermal density by as much as 101.86% (Wamsley et al.) [8], demonstrating scientifically proven high efficacy against atrophic acne scars, fine lines, and sagging (skin laxity) [13, 14].
- Short downtime:Erythema (redness) resolves within a few days, and RCTs have proven low risk of long-term hyperpigmentation and high safety compared to fractional lasers and similar treatments [13, 14].
- Recommended treatment schedule:To experience dramatic improvement, continuing 4–6 treatments at 4-week intervals is recommended in the literature [17, 18].
【Consultation with a Specialist】
Potenza is a wonderful treatment with the potential to transform lives for many people struggling with acne scars, enlarged pores, and sagging (skin laxity). However, the optimal needle depth and RF power settings vary in detail depending on your skin condition (type and depth of acne scars, skin quality). If you have expectations based on the data presented in this article, or if you want to know whether Potenza is right for your skin, please feel free to consult with a specialist clinic first. We will propose a customized treatment plan tailored to your skin.
About the author of this article
Hiromitsu NakamuraPhysician, Ginza Clinic
Zetith Beauty Clinic Ginza, Shinsaibashi Osaka, and Fukuoka Clinics
With a track record of research presentations at domestic and international academic conferences, involved in technical guidance and education across all Zetith Beauty Clinic locations. Specializes in precision aesthetic medicine based on anatomical evidence, pursuing natural results tailored to each individual's skeletal structure and tissues.