HIFU or radiofrequency: a clinical perspective
Video in Spanish · subtitles available
HIFU or radiofrequency to rejuvenate the face? I want to share an opinion that is probably different from what you usually hear in aesthetic medicine: personally, I do not recommend facial HIFU as an anti-aging treatment. In this video I explain the mechanism, the risks, and why I prefer to preserve tissue.
A clinical and honest look at HIFU and radiofrequency for the face. I explain how they work — focused ultrasound that deposits energy at different depths and creates controlled thermal injury points, even in planes close to the SMAS — and why producing repair collagen is not the same as rejuvenating.
I review the documented complications (fat atrophy, sensory disturbances, nerve injuries, abnormal scarring) and why facial volume loss particularly concerns me: a young face is not just tight skin. I do not deny that studies exist showing some lifting effect in selected patients, but long-term evidence is limited.
My philosophy is to preserve healthy tissue, improve skin quality and stimulate regeneration in a controlled way, rather than pursuing aggressive contraction through deep thermal injury. That is why, personally, I neither use nor recommend HIFU as a rejuvenation strategy.
Related article
Doctor Florian A. Vallecillo Cabrera
The doctor on video
Informational content by Doctor Florian A. Vallecillo Cabrera. It does not replace an in-person consultation or an individual diagnosis.
