RF Microneedling: Morpheus8, Potenza and the Evidence

Not yet medically reviewed. This page has not been reviewed by a licensed professional. It summarises published research, cited below, and is not medical advice. Medical disclaimer

RF (radiofrequency) microneedling pushes insulated or bare needles into the skin and releases heat at the tips. Morpheus8 (InMode) is the best-known system; Potenza, Sylfirm X, Genius, Secret RF, Vivace and Virtue RF work on the same principle. Randomized trials support it best for atrophic acne scars, where it performs roughly on par with a fractional CO2 laser with less redness and less pigment darkening, and it has moderate evidence for underarm sweating. Evidence for tightening and wrinkles is weaker and mostly uncontrolled.

Two regulatory facts change how to read the marketing. First, the FDA does not clear these machines as microneedling devices. All 20 RF clearances we checked sit under product code GEI, the code for electrosurgical cutting and coagulation devices, and most are cleared “for electrocoagulation and hemostasis”, not for skin tightening. Second, on 15 October 2025 the FDA issued a safety communication saying it was aware of reports of “burns, scarring, fat loss, disfigurement, and nerve damage” with these devices, including cases needing surgical repair, and that RF microneedling “is a medical procedure, not a cosmetic treatment, and these devices should not be used at home.”

What the FDA’s 2025 warning says

The communication, “Potential Risks with Certain Uses of Radiofrequency (RF) Microneedling”, is aimed at the aesthetic uses: treating wrinkles or achieving effects “sometimes referred to as resurfacing, ‘tightening’ or ‘rejuvenation'”. It did not recall any device or withdraw any clearance. Its recommendations to patients are to discuss the risks with a provider, to be treated only by “a licensed health care provider with training and experience” on these devices, to ask which device the provider plans to use, and to report complications through MedWatch.

The FDA described its evaluation as ongoing and said it was “working with manufacturers of these devices to evaluate the issue and identify mitigation strategies as appropriate.” As of 6 October 2026 the page still carries its original date (content current as of 10/15/2025), so no update has been published.

The same page confirms the regulatory route: RF microneedling devices “are Class II medical devices cleared by the FDA through the 510(k) process”, and the FDA points readers to each device’s 510(k) summary for “the indication for which the device was authorized.”

What each device is actually cleared for

We read the 510(k) summary behind every number below. The indication column quotes the summary; where a product has several clearances, the most recent one is quoted unless an older one says something different. Features come from the same summaries.

Device (maker) FDA numbers Cleared indication, as stated Notable from the summaries
Morpheus8 (InMode) K192695 2019, K200947 2020, K231790 2023, K240017 2024 “intended for use in dermatologic procedures where coagulation/contraction of soft tissue or hemostasis is needed. At higher energy levels greater than 62 mJ/pin, the use of the Morpheus8 Applicator is limited to Skin Types I-IV” (K231790). The 2019 and 2020 clearances say “electrocoagulation and hemostasis” with the same skin-type limit. 1 MHz output; disposable 12-pin, 24-pin and “T” tips for the face and a 40-pin Body applicator (K231790). K240017 adds the Morpheus8 90 applicator.
Potenza (Jeisys) K192545 2020, K201685 2021, K231287 2024, K231216 2024, K254185 2026 (Potenza Prime) “intended for use in dermatologic and general surgical procedures for electrocoagulation and hemostasis.” Potenza Prime adds: “At higher energy levels greater than 62mJ/pin, the DDR tips are limited to Fitzpatrick Skin Types I-IV.” Monopolar and bipolar modes; 1 MHz or 2 MHz (K192545).
Secret RF, Secret Pro, Secret MAX (Ilooda) K170325 2017, K182355 2019, K233374 2023, K241157 2024 Secret RF: “intended for use in dermatologic and general surgical procedures for electro-coagulation and hemostasis.” Secret Pro adds a CO2 laser whose “Fractional mode is indicated only for ablative skin resurfacing.” Secret MAX adds a non-thermal RF massage menu for “Temporary reduction in the appearance of cellulite.” Bipolar, 2 MHz (K170325). Secret Pro combines RF microneedling and a CO2 laser in one console.
Vivace (ShenB) K193070 2021 “electrocoagulation and hemostasis and the percutaneous treatment of facial wrinkles for use with Fitzpatrick Skin Type I to Skin Type V when using the 1MHz setting.” The 2 MHz setting “has not been evaluated” for wrinkles. Bipolar, 36-needle (6 x 6) tip; 1 MHz and 2 MHz.
Virtue RF (ShenB) K202415 2021, K211562 2021 Smart RF handpiece at 1 MHz: electrocoagulation, hemostasis “and the percutaneous treatment of facial wrinkles”, skin types I-V. The Exact RF and Deep RF handpieces added in K211562 are each “not intended to treat wrinkles.” Bipolar, 36 needles; 1 MHz and 2 MHz.
Sylfirm X (VIOL) K200185 2020, K213612 2022 “intended for use in dermatologic procedures for electrocoagulation and hemostasis” (K213612). Bipolar, 2 MHz; needle depth 0.3 to 4.0 mm in 0.1 mm steps (K213612).
Genius (Lutronic) K180945 2018, K253484 2026 “intended for use in dermatologic and general surgical procedures for electrocoagulation/contraction and hemostasis” (K253484). Bipolar, 460 kHz (changed from 1 MHz in K180945); maximum depth 4.0 mm, up from 3.5 mm (K253484 comparison table).

Only two systems, Vivace and the Smart RF handpiece of Virtue RF, carry a wrinkle indication, and only at 1 MHz in skin types I to V. No indication statement we read uses the words “skin tightening”, “acne scars” or “fat”. InMode’s later wording, “coagulation/contraction of soft tissue”, is the closest any clearance comes. The 62 mJ/pin limit for skin types I to IV on Morpheus8 and Potenza Prime is a condition written into the clearance, which matters for the skin-of-color section below.

For how this differs from the QAI code used for ordinary microneedling pens, see microneedling and FDA clearance and the full list on is it FDA cleared?.

Evidence by condition

Acne scars: the strongest case

Acne scarring has the most randomized evidence, and most of it compares RF microneedling with a fractional CO2 laser.

  • A 2026 meta-analysis of eight RCTs (249 patients) by Argobi and colleagues found the CO2 laser slightly better for scar improvement (mean difference 0.31) and patient satisfaction, while RF microneedling caused less pain, a shorter period of redness (by 1.72 days) and less post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation (PIH): the laser carried 4.44 times the PIH risk.
  • A 2023 Copenhagen split-face trial (Hendel and colleagues, 15 patients, one treatment) found both methods gave the same median 1-point improvement in scar texture on a 0-10 scale at three months. Patients rated RF microneedling as more painful.
  • A 2026 Shanghai split-face trial (Li and colleagues, 30 completers, three sessions eight weeks apart) found no significant difference on the ECCA scar score (54.73 to 30.53 with RF microneedling, 53.67 to 31.03 with the laser), with shorter redness and fewer PIH events on the RF side.
  • A 2025 systematic review of RF microneedling alone (Niaz and colleagues, 16 studies, 481 patients, six of them RCTs) called it “likely an effective treatment” and asked for more randomized trials to settle treatment settings.

One result cuts the other way. A 2022 meta-analysis of 12 RCTs comparing microneedling with other treatments (Shen and colleagues) found plain microneedling significantly better than comparators on objective scar improvement, while the RF microneedling group “exhibited no significance”. Read together, the trials say RF microneedling works for acne scars; they do not show that adding RF beats plain needling. No head-to-head trial of Morpheus8 against a plain pen was found. Our comparison of microneedling with other treatments covers lasers, peels and plain needling.

Tightening, laxity and wrinkles

The evidence here is thinner than the advertising. A 2021 critical review in Dermatologic Surgery (Tan and colleagues), which kept only randomized, split-body or blinded studies, found 14 on skin rejuvenation and concluded that remodeling is “slow and progressive” and continues to improve “even 6 months after treatment.”

A 2026 systematic review of 20 facial-rejuvenation studies (558 participants, Kumar and colleagues) reported consistent improvement in texture and tightening and no serious complications. Three of its five authors declared ties to Jeisys, the maker of Potenza: two work in its medical affairs department and one is a company speaker.

Controlled trials are small. A 2019 split-face study of facial photoaging in Chinese patients (Liu and colleagues) found lower skin roughness on the treated side at one and three months, against an untreated side. No published sham-controlled trial of Morpheus8 for laxity was found.

Underarm sweating (hyperhidrosis)

A 2025 meta-analysis of six studies (Vaish and colleagues) found an average fall of 1.63 points on the Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Score, a 52% reduction, rating the evidence moderate. A 2024 Cairo trial (Eid and colleagues) treated one armpit with four RF microneedling sessions and the other with a single botulinum toxin session in 20 patients: RF microneedling was inferior at 12 months, less satisfying to patients and “substantially more painful”. None of the clearances above names hyperhidrosis.

“Morpheus8 before and after”: what trials measured

Before-and-after galleries are chosen by the clinic posting them. The trials give a more modest picture: a median 1-point texture gain on a 10-point scale after one session in the Copenhagen trial, roughly a 44% fall in ECCA score after three sessions in the Shanghai trial (54.73 to 30.53, our arithmetic from the published means), and gradual change that keeps developing for months. Most trials used several sessions spaced weeks apart.

Patients post their own timelines too, such as a thread in r/30PlusSkinCare whose URL reads “morpheus8 update 35 weeks post”. We could not retrieve its title or text, so we cannot say what it reports. One person’s photos, at any point, are a single uncontrolled case.

Morpheus8 update: 3.5 weeks post
byu/Leemurmoo in30PlusSkinCare

Is RF microneedling safe?

In trials, side effects were mostly short-lived redness, swelling and pain. The serious injuries the FDA listed come mainly from post-market reports and case reports, which show they occur without showing how often. The general side-effect data for microneedling is on our safety guide, which also explains why plain-needling rates cannot be read across to RF devices.

Skin of color: PIH and burns

The clearances themselves set a limit: above 62 mJ per pin, Morpheus8 and Potenza Prime’s DDR tips are limited to Fitzpatrick types I-IV, and the Vivace and Virtue RF wrinkle indications stop at type V.

The FDA’s general microneedling page lists “darker skin type” among reasons the procedure “may NOT be suitable”, noting that some authorized devices “were not studied in subjects with darker skin types.”

Within the clearance limits the published record is reassuring but weak. A 2023 review of RF and RF microneedling in Fitzpatrick types III-VI (Syder and colleagues, 35 articles) found transient PIH in seven studies, mild prolonged hyperpigmentation in one and permanent scarring in one, and noted that “a large proportion of the studies lack strong quality evidence.” The comparative trials above point the same way: less PIH than a CO2 laser. Case reports still exist, such as tram-track scarring after RF microneedling in a Fitzpatrick type IV patient (Hidajat and Murlistyarini, 2023), which cleared over six months with treatment.

Fat loss and volume loss: documented, but not measured

Fat loss is no longer only an online anecdote. It appears in the FDA’s list of reported complications, and two 2026 analyses of the FDA’s adverse event database found it among the most common reported problems:

  • Chou and colleagues (Massachusetts General Hospital) identified 114 reports with 224 events from 2013 to October 2025. The leading categories were textural change (25%), pigment change (18%) and fat loss (26 events, 11.6%).
  • Camacho-Hubbard and colleagues found 86 reports from 2020 to 2025, with fat loss, scarring and post-inflammatory redness the most reported.

A 2026 surgeon’s series of 180 neck lifts (O’Daniel and Patton) found fibrosis and “unpredictable fat distribution” in patients who had earlier non-surgical neck treatments, but it grouped Morpheus8 with Kybella, CoolSculpting, FaceTite, Ultherapy and others, so it cannot isolate one device.

On the other side, a 2024 randomized split-face study in 32 patients (Wu and colleagues) measured the submental area by ultrasound after microneedle RF and found the dermis thickened while “the fat layer did not change significantly.” That is one small trial at its own settings.

What is missing is a rate. Adverse event reports cannot say how often fat loss happens, at what settings, or in whom. The honest answer to “does Morpheus8 cause fat loss?” is that it has been reported to the FDA repeatedly and in published reviews of those reports, and that no study has measured its frequency.

“Morpheus8 ruined my skin”: the reports

Searches like this one lead to first-person accounts. One example is a thread in r/DermatologyQuestions whose URL reads “damage from morpheus8 rf microneedling suggestions”. We could not retrieve its title or text, so we cannot say what happened in it, only that it is there.

Damage from Morpheus8 RF Microneedling – Suggestions?
byu/Comfortable_Name_556 inDermatologyQuestions

Single accounts cannot establish cause. The FDA’s own database is a more structured version of the same kind of evidence, described next.

What the FDA’s injury database shows (and why counts mislead)

Searching the FDA’s adverse event database (MAUDE, via openFDA) by product code does not work for RF microneedling. Code GEI covers every electrosurgical cutting and coagulation device, from operating-room units to these aesthetic systems, and returned 118,290 reports when we queried it on 6 October 2026. There is no way to separate the RF microneedling share by code.

Brand names are the workaround, with a trap of their own. A search for “Morpheus” returns 284 reports for the Morpheus PICC, an intravenous catheter made by AngioDynamics. Restricting to reports naming Morpheus8, or naming Morpheus with InMode as maker, gave 92 reports (dated 2020 to 2026): 90 coded as injury, one as malfunction and one as death. 49 were filed by the manufacturer and 43 were voluntary reports.

The death report is a voluntary report from a family member stating that a relative died during a microneedling procedure in Mexico in 2025. It gives no cause and no clinical detail.

Across the 92 reports, the patient problems tagged most often were scar tissue (25 reports), redness (24), deformity or disfigurement (15), hyperpigmentation (14) and burns (7). In 18 narratives, phrases such as “fat loss”, “fat atrophy” or “volume loss” appear.

Brand searched Reports found
Morpheus8 (InMode) 92
Sylfirm X 9
Potenza 6
Secret RF 5
Genius (Lutronic) 5
Vivace 3
Virtue RF 3

Do not read this table as a safety ranking. Morpheus8 is the most widely marketed system, report counts track how many treatments are given and how much publicity a device gets, reporting is voluntary for patients, one event can be reported twice (by the patient and the maker), and reports are unverified. Some reports also list a different product code (all three Vivace reports carry OUH, not GEI), which is another reason code-based counts fail. To file a report, see if something goes wrong.

Is there an at-home RF microneedling device?

No home RF microneedling device appears among the clearances we checked: every one is a professional system, and the FDA’s 2025 communication says plainly that these devices “should not be used at home.”

Products sold as “RF microneedling” for home use are usually something else. CurrentBody’s “RF Microneedling Treatment” kit ($459.99 on its US site, checked 6 October 2026) pairs a radiofrequency skin device with separate microneedle patches the company describes as “made from dissolvable ingredients”; the RF is not delivered through needles. Other listings found in search results, including one titled “At-Home RF Microneedling Machine for Wrinkles, Scars, and Skin Firming (Max. 8mm Depth)”, could not be loaded, so what they contain is unverified. A needle depth of 8 mm would be deeper than the 4.0 mm maximum of the clinic systems whose summaries state one. For plain needling at home, see our at-home microneedling guide.

FAQ

Is Morpheus8 FDA approved? No. It is FDA-cleared through the 510(k) route, which is a different process from approval, and the clearances (K192695, K200947, K231790, K240017) are for dermatologic procedures needing “coagulation/contraction of soft tissue or hemostasis”, not for skin tightening or acne scars by name.

Is there an FDA warning on RF microneedling? Yes. The FDA issued a safety communication on 15 October 2025 about reports of burns, scarring, fat loss, disfigurement and nerve damage, and said the devices should not be used at home. It did not recall any device.

Is RF microneedling better than regular microneedling? Not shown. For acne scars, one 2022 meta-analysis of RCTs found plain microneedling significantly better than comparators while RF microneedling was not, and no direct trial of Morpheus8 against a plain pen was found.

Is RF microneedling safe for dark skin? Not proven either way. A 2023 review found mostly transient PIH and comparative trials found less pigment darkening than with a CO2 laser, but the review rated much of the evidence as weak, and the Morpheus8 and Potenza Prime clearances limit higher energies (above 62 mJ per pin) to skin types I-IV.

How many sessions do studies use? Usually several. The acne-scar trials cited here used one to three sessions, the hyperhidrosis trial four, spaced weeks apart.

Sources

  • FDA Safety Communication, Potential Risks with Certain Uses of Radiofrequency (RF) Microneedling (issued 2025-10-15, content current as of 10/15/2025, checked 2026-10-06): https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/safety-communications/potential-risks-certain-uses-radiofrequency-rf-microneedling-fda-safety-communication
  • FDA, Microneedling Devices (checked 2026-10-06): https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/aesthetic-cosmetic-devices/microneedling-devices
  • FDA 510(k) summaries (indications and device descriptions quoted above, read 2026-10-06):
  • K192695, InMode System with the Morpheus8 (Fractora) Applicators, 2019-12-27: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf19/K192695.pdf
  • K200947, InMode System with the Morpheus8 Applicators, 2020-07-02: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf20/K200947.pdf
  • K231790, The InMode System with the Morpheus8 Applicators, 2023-07-20: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf23/K231790.pdf
  • K240017, InMode System with the Morpheus8 90 Applicator, 2024-06-13: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf24/K240017.pdf
  • K192545, Potenza (Jeisys Medical), 2020-02-20: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf19/K192545.pdf
  • K201685, Potenza, 2021-01-19: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf20/K201685.pdf
  • K231287, POTENZA, 2024-11-05: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf23/K231287.pdf
  • K231216, POTENZA, 2024-12-10: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf23/K231216.pdf
  • K254185, Potenza Prime, 2026-09-11: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf25/K254185.pdf
  • K170325, SECRET RF (Ilooda), 2017-06-13: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf17/K170325.pdf
  • K182355, Secret RF Smartcure Applicator, 2019-09-06: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf18/K182355.pdf
  • K233374, Secret Pro, 2023-12-14: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf23/K233374.pdf
  • K241157, Secret MAX Multi-platform RF System, 2024-11-21: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf24/K241157.pdf
  • K193070, VIVACE Electrosurgical Device (ShenB), 2021-04-26: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf19/K193070.pdf
  • K202415, VirtueRF (ShenB), 2021-01-22: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf20/K202415.pdf
  • K211562, Virtue RF, 2021-11-23: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf21/K211562.pdf
  • K200185, SYLFIRM X (VIOL), 2020-04-22: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf20/K200185.pdf
  • K213612, SYLFIRM X, 2022-06-23: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf21/K213612.pdf
  • K180945, LUTRONIC GENIUS Radiofrequency System, 2018-12-10: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf18/K180945.pdf
  • K253484, LUTRONIC GENIUS (Cynosure Lutronic), 2026-06-29: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf25/K253484.pdf
  • PMID 41821146: Argobi Y et al. Fractional CO2 Laser Versus Micro Needling Radiofrequency for Post Acne Scarring: A Meta-Analysis of RCTs. J Cosmet Dermatol, 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41821146/
  • PMID 36934435: Hendel K et al. Fractional CO(2) -laser versus microneedle radiofrequency for acne scars: A randomized, single treatment, split-face trial. Lasers Surg Med, 2023. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36934435/
  • PMID 42312398: Li W et al. Comparative efficacy, recovery, and pigmentary safety of radiofrequency microneedling and fractional carbon dioxide laser for facial atrophic acne scars: a prospective randomized split-face trial. J Dermatolog Treat, 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42312398/
  • PMID 39781098: Niaz G et al. Fractional Radiofrequency Microneedling as a Monotherapy in Acne Scar Management: A Systematic Review of Current Evidence. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol, 2025. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39781098/
  • PMID 35426044: Shen YC et al. Microneedling Monotherapy for Acne Scar: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Aesthetic Plast Surg, 2022. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35426044/
  • PMID 33577211: Tan MG et al. Radiofrequency Microneedling: A Comprehensive and Critical Review. Dermatol Surg, 2021. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33577211/
  • PMID 41947517: Kumar N et al. Radiofrequency Microneedling for Facial Rejuvenation: A Systematic Review. J Cosmet Dermatol, 2026 (authors’ Jeisys ties declared). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41947517/
  • PMID 30710383: Liu TM et al. Microneedle fractional radiofrequency treatment of facial photoageing as assessed in a split-face model. Clin Exp Dermatol, 2019. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30710383/
  • PMID 39761372: Vaish MH et al. Radiofrequency Microneedling in Treating Primary Hyperhidrosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Dermatol Surg, 2025. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39761372/
  • PMID 38981914: Eid RO et al. Long-term efficacy of fractional microneedle radiofrequency versus botulinum toxin-A in primary axillary hyperhidrosis: a randomized controlled trial. Lasers Med Sci, 2024. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38981914/
  • PMID 36826381: Syder NC et al. Radiofrequency and Radiofrequency Microneedling in Skin of Color: A Review of Usage, Safety, and Efficacy. Dermatol Surg, 2023. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36826381/
  • PMID 38245846: Hidajat D, Murlistyarini S. Successful treatment of rare adverse event after radiofrequency microneedle on Fitzpatrick skin type IV : a case report. J Cosmet Laser Ther, 2023. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38245846/
  • PMID 41886649: Chou M et al. Analysis of US Food and Drug Administration Data on Radiofrequency Microneedling Device Complications. Dermatol Surg, 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41886649/
  • PMID 42430734: Camacho-Hubbard I et al. Safety Considerations and Complications With Radiofrequency Microneedling: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of the US FDA MAUDE Database. Dermatol Surg, 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42430734/
  • PMID 40712094: O’Daniel TG, Patton S. Neck Lift After Nonsurgical Treatments: Fibrosis, Fat Loss, and Surgical Complexity. Aesthet Surg J, 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40712094/
  • PMID 38051121: Wu X et al. Microneedling Radiofrequency Enhances Poly-L-Lactic Acid Penetration That Effectively Improves Facial Skin Laxity without Lipolysis. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2024. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38051121/
  • openFDA device adverse events, product code GEI, total (data last updated 2026-09-29, queried 2026-10-06): https://api.fda.gov/device/event.json?search=device.device_report_product_code:GEI&limit=1
  • openFDA, brand name “morpheus” broken down by brand (shows the Morpheus PICC catheter reports, queried 2026-10-06): https://api.fda.gov/device/event.json?search=device.brand_name:morpheus&count=device.brand_name.exact
  • openFDA, Morpheus8 reports (brand Morpheus8, or Morpheus with InMode as maker; queried 2026-10-06): https://api.fda.gov/device/event.json?search=(device.brand_name:morpheus8+OR+(device.brand_name:morpheus+AND+device.manufacturer_d_name:inmode))&limit=100
  • openFDA, other brands (queried 2026-10-06): https://api.fda.gov/device/event.json?search=device.brand_name:sylfirm&limit=100 ; https://api.fda.gov/device/event.json?search=device.brand_name:potenza&limit=100 ; https://api.fda.gov/device/event.json?search=device.brand_name:%22secret+rf%22&limit=100 ; https://api.fda.gov/device/event.json?search=(device.brand_name:genius+AND+device.manufacturer_d_name:lutronic)&limit=100 ; https://api.fda.gov/device/event.json?search=device.brand_name:vivace&limit=100 ; https://api.fda.gov/device/event.json?search=(device.brand_name:virtue+AND+(device.manufacturer_d_name:shenb+OR+device.manufacturer_d_name:cartessa))&limit=100
  • CurrentBody, RF Microneedling Treatment (price and description, checked 2026-10-06): https://www.currentbody.us/products/currentbody-skin-rf-microneedling-treatment