Application of Micro-Plasma Radiofrequency in Promoting Wound Healing of Infected Skin Ulcers.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy of micro-plasma radio-frequency (MPRF) in enhancing the healing of infected skin ulcers.

METHODS

This study involved ten patients diagnosed with infected skin ulcers between May and December 2023. Treatments were administered using MPRF every three days until the ulcers healed completely. We assessed microbial infection status, wound healing progression, healing duration, and changes in patient-reported symptoms such as pain and itching. We also monitored for adverse effects, including erythema and blisters, and evaluated scar formation post-healing.

RESULTS

Cultures from the wounds of all ten patients became negative after 2-8 MPRF treatments. After 7-15 treatments, over 90% of the ulcers healed, indicating an effective therapeutic outcome. Patients reported no itching or discomfort during treatment, experiencing only transient, mild, and tolerable pain. No cases of erythema, edema, or other skin irritations were observed. Six-month follow-up showed mild scarring in the treated areas, primarily presenting as hyperpigmentation or hypopigmentation.

CONCLUSIONS

Micro-plasma radio-frequency (MPRF) demonstrates significant potential in promoting the healing of infected skin ulcers. This is evidenced by the rapid bacterial clearance (cultures turning negative after 2-8 treatments) and a high healing rate (>90% after 7-15 treatments) observed in all 10 patients. Furthermore, its ease of operation, convenient application, and favorable safety profile-characterized by transient, mild, and tolerable pain, absence of local skin irritation (e.g., erythema, edema), and mild scar formation (primarily hyper- or hypopigmentation) upon 6-month follow-up-underscore its promise. While these preliminary findings are encouraging, further large-scale clinical studies are warranted to conclusively establish the efficacy and long-term safety of MPRF in wound healing.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This study is classified as a case series, as it included only 10 patients and lacked a control group for comparison. Such a study design does not provide high-level evidence of causality; its findings primarily offer descriptive observations and preliminary evidence for future higher-quality research, such as randomized controlled trials.