Do newer thread shapes last longer? Current state of comparative data

There is still no solid comparative data supporting that new threads with cogs (barbs on the thread) arranged in three dimensions last longer than previous generations[1]. There are reports from prospective studies followed for up to 6 months showing improved wrinkle assessment, but these are not direct comparisons with other threads[1]. Based on current literature, realistic expectations should be set at approximately half a year of improvement[2].

What changes when cogs are arranged in three dimensions?

The design concept is that the thread grabs tissue over a larger surface area, making force distribution more even. In the thread studied, cogs were arranged circumferentially at 120-degree, 240-degree, and 360-degree angles, creating a structure that catches on one side while lifting tissue on the opposite side[1]. There are preliminary reports suggesting that with this arrangement, results might last longer than previous generations[1]. However, the same paper states that solid comparative data supporting this are insufficient[1].

What did the 6-month prospective study measure?

Wrinkle severity and overall improvement. In the prospective study targeting the midface and nasolabial folds, wrinkle severity scale and overall improvement scale assessments were performed at baseline and at 1, 3, and 6 months[1]. It was reported that wrinkle assessment improvement was maintained through 6 months[1]. What is important to note is that this was not a trial comparing it with threads or designs from other companies. It was a study carefully documenting the performance of one type of thread[1].

The fact that follow-up ended at 6 months is also significant. This study does not answer what remains beyond 12 months[1].

In studies that measured with photographs, how did the thread perform?

There are comparisons measured with photographs in addition to visual assessment. In a study of 143 Japanese subjects comparing photographs in sitting and reclining positions, tissue movement viewed from the front was 20.8% in the control group, 20.7% in the ultrasound (HIFU) group, and 14.1% in the Thread lift group[3]. Only the Thread lift group showed significantly smaller movement, while the ultrasound group showed no difference[3]. This study also points out that sagging (skin laxity) should be assessed in a sitting position[3].

However, this study also has limitations noted in the paper. The number and type of threads used varied by physician and were not standardized, and detailed records of past Thread lift treatments were lacking, so the authors themselves state this is a trend rather than a definitive conclusion[3].

Why is comparative data between generations insufficient?

Because study designs are not standardized. It has been pointed out that Thread lift research is often retrospective or descriptive, often based on small case series, and there is large variability in technique and reporting methods[1]. Systematic reviews similarly identify small sample sizes, short observation periods, and lack of objective evaluation metrics[4]. While progress has been made in organizing shape differences such as U-shaped versus I-shaped designs, there are no new objective data specifically comparing 3D cogs with others[5].

A review summarizing breast Thread lift clearly states the limitations of this field. Thread lifting primarily provides short-term cosmetic improvement, and it is not appropriate to present it as equivalent to permanent effects[2]. The same interpretation applies to facial threads.

Verifying during consultation with these limitations in mind

There are three things to confirm. How many months of improvement are expected with this thread, what study is the basis for that expectation and how many months did it measure, and what is the plan if results regress when you return. If the explanation stops at "because it's a new structure it lasts longer," try asking for more detail.

Precisely because this is a research-limited area, whether the physician can discuss limitations becomes the basis for judgment. How much improvement you can expect in your own face only becomes concrete after examination to assess the degree of sagging (skin laxity) and skin thickness.