A March 2026 prospective study followed 39 people at four sites after two XERF sessions. Investigators reported short-term aesthetic improvement and high satisfaction. It is useful early evidence, but the study had no untreated or comparison group, lasted 90 days after the second treatment, and cannot predict an individual result.
What actually happened in the study?
The published four-site study enrolled 39 participants with facial laxity. Everyone received two XERF sessions, four weeks apart. The researchers assessed people 30 and 90 days after the final session. That schedule matters: the paper describes outcomes after two treatments. It cannot tell you what one session would do, or whether a third would add value.
Clinicians used a five-point Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS). A score of three means “improved,” and higher scores mean greater improvement. At the 90-day visit, 36 of 39 patients received clinician scores of at least three. Separately, 33 of 39 patients rated satisfaction at four or higher on a five-point scale. Those are study-group figures, not success rates for a Garden City appointment.
What makes this evidence useful?
The team planned measurements before treatment, enrolled patients at four sites, and reported both clinician assessments and patient satisfaction. That gives a more structured view than a set of promotional before-and-after images. It also gives readers a concrete time window: roughly one month and three months after the second session.
The paper reported no persistent adverse events during its follow-up. That statement applies to 39 observed people over a limited period. It does not establish the frequency of uncommon harms. If safety is your main question, read our XERF safety and FDA guide alongside the study.
Where do the numbers stop helping?
There was no sham-treatment group and no head-to-head comparison with another device. The treating investigators also scored improvement without blinding. A high GAIS percentage therefore does not prove XERF outperforms Thermage, ultrasound, or no treatment. The authors themselves call for controlled comparison and independent blinded photo review.
Follow-up ended 90 days after the second session. The paper cannot settle how long a result lasts or whether maintenance is needed. Most participants were women; only two were men. The study included Fitzpatrick skin types I–IV, so its result should not be generalized to types V–VI. Our skin-tone guide explains that gap.
The paper discloses that Cynosure Lutronic supplied the device and consumables and gave the sites a modest research grant; it says the sponsor had no role in study conduct or manuscript preparation. That does not invalidate the results. It raises the value of independent replication.
“Your article says two sessions. What plan would you consider for my concern, what would you use to document change, and when would you reassess?” A useful answer should describe your own baseline and explain uncertainty.
How should a Garden City visitor use this research?
Bring the study to a consultation as a starting point, not a forecast. Ask which concern the clinician would target, whether your health history changes suitability, and what would count as a meaningful change to you. If your priority is marked skin excess or a sharply defined jawline, ask whether a noninvasive treatment can reasonably meet it. The American Academy of Dermatology recommends discussing likely outcomes, risks, recovery, and alternatives with the treating professional.
See our XERF timeline guide for how the two published human reports differ. XERF appointments through Detroit Beauty Connect are at a participating location in Garden City, Michigan. Visitors from nearby cities travel there. Book a free consultation
Primary sources
These records support the factual details above. Study findings belong to the enrolled patients, and FDA records should be checked for later updates.
- Weiss et al., prospective multicenter XERF study, March 2026
- American Academy of Dermatology, questions before cosmetic treatment
Researched by Detroit Beauty Connect, September 29, 2026. This is informational content, not medical advice or a claim of clinician review.