4D HIFUマシンはフェイスリフトのための最新技術です, しわ取り, and body sculpting. The technology is first developed as a product named Ultraformer III. It generates continuous micro-thermal coagulation and the coagulated tissue shrinks as the phenomenon Occurs. The reconstruction of collagen fibers will improve skin texture and lifting results.

How is the 4D HIFU working？

高密度焦点式超音波 (HIFU) directly delivers heat energy to the skin. また, it works on subcutaneous tissue that can stimulate and recover the skin’s collagen and thus consequently improve the texture. その間, it reduces the sagging of the skin.

It’s heating directly to deeper tissue, in order to lift the skin. It is performed in the office e with only ultrasound gel applied to the skin. An ultrasound screen image allows the physician to visualize the level of treatment before energy is applied to the targeted tissue. The treatment takes from 45 に 90 minutes depending on the area treated.

アドバンテージ

• エネルギーのさまざまな組み合わせを調整する, 浸透, 密度, さまざまな患者のニーズに合わせたサイズとサイズ.
• 高い収益性のROI
• 35% faster – 4D HIFU’s enables a short session by its high repetition rate, 連続パルス撮影 & 2 つのハンドピースを利用できるため、カートリッジの交換に必要な時間を節約できます。.
• Single-handed control – 4D HIFU’s light gun-shaped hand-piece allows the user to control it with a single hand eliminating exhaustion over extended-use periods.

All kinds of handles can meet everyone!

3 phases of 4D HIFU

The whole treatment will go through collagen aging, shrinking, 食作用, Fibroblasts, and Collagen Regeneration.

Inflammation Phase

The 4D Ultrasound energy transferred directly into the dermis causes inflammation of skin tissue followed by a natural process of fibroplasia, or migration of new connective tissue for wound healing purposes.

Remodeling Phase

Granulation tissue forms on the wound, inducing a tighter and more uniform buildup of collagen fibers. On the exterior, the patient will notice diminishing wrinkles and a tighter complexion between a period of 3 weeks and 6 月.

Recovering Phase

After the first 2 phases, the skin will recover to get the best results.

Treatment comparison