Microwave: the one-year follow-up paper was retracted in 2026, and there are no randomised trials

Every human study we found is either uncontrolled, or non-randomised, or both: ten people, twenty people, and a retrospective comparison of 171.

The most frequently cited synthesis in this field is a 2024 paper of 'International Advisory Board recommendations'. The title says so. It is a consensus on how to use the device, not a trial.

Why an advisory board document cannot be read as evidence is simple. A recommendation is someone's judgement; a trial is a procedure designed to test judgement. Put them in the same column and the point of this site collapses.

Radiofrequency and microfocused ultrasound at least had randomised trials of device against device. Microwave does not have even that.

'Use of a microwave device for the treatment of cellulite and localized fat adiposity: a 1-year follow-up study' (Skin Res Technol 2023;29(7):e13408, PMID 37522509). An observational study of 45 patients given four sessions and followed for a year, concluding that results lasted.

The journal retracted it in January 2026 (Skin Res Technol 2026;32(1):e70317).

Our paper-collection script refuses anything PubMed flags as a Retracted Publication. When we tried to add this one, the script rejected it — which is why it does not appear in the source list, and why this page cites it only by PMID.

One more thing is worth noting. Even the pre-retraction abstract contained this line: there was no mention of assessment of pain or side effects. Safety was in the conclusion without having been measured.

This is why this site does not cite papers from memory. Articles written in 2025 on the strength of this paper are still online, unchanged.

The 2026 study looked back at the records of 171 East Asian patients treated at a single institution (microwave 89, ultrasound 82). There was no randomisation — patient and clinician chose the treatment, and whatever drove that choice comes along into the result.

The finding depends on when you look.

• Month 1: microwave was better on graded improvement (GAIS) and on measured elasticity, with fewer adverse events.
• Month 3: ultrasound had overtaken it — on sustained graded improvement, on satisfaction (FACE-Q) and on elasticity.

The authors read the two as complementary: microwave has a fast onset and is easier to tolerate, ultrasound lasts longer.

One more caution: follow-up ends at three months. What happens at six months or a year to a result that reversed at three, this study does not say.

The 2025 study treated ten women with moderate to severe submental laxity, twice with 30 days between sessions, ten minutes each, with a 2.45 GHz device.

The submental laxity grade (SMSLG) fell from a mean of 3.6 at baseline to 2.3 at twelve weeks. No adverse effects were reported and discomfort during and after treatment was described as minimal.

How to read that matters. Ten people, and nothing to compare against. A result measured from baseline to twelve weeks is mixed in with time, with swelling, with lighting, and with knowing you were treated.

And no adverse effects being reported is not the same as there being none. Ten people cannot see an uncommon event.

The 2023 study measured twenty patients (men and women) who had received four abdominal sessions, using 3D imaging. The authors describe it themselves as a retrospective, non-randomised observational study.

From baseline to three months, circumference fell from 85.2 ± 8.1 cm to 80.8 ± 8.2 cm and volume from 1950.6 ± 471.0 cm³ to 1728.9 ± 490.9 cm³ (p < .001).

3D measurement is a firmer endpoint than a human eye, and in that respect this study is better than others on this page.

But the absence of a control group bites especially hard in body treatments. Whatever happened to habits or weight over three months goes straight into the result. The authors also report a satisfaction questionnaire, in which 90% were interested in treating other areas — satisfaction is not itself evidence of effect.

The dimpled surface of cellulite is explained by thick collagen septa dividing subcutaneous fat and pulling the skin down.

The 2020 study examined microwave-treated tissue with Picrosirius red staining and circularly polarised microscopy. The compact bundles of type I collagen forming the septa appeared reduced or dissolved, partly replaced by more diffuse, finely reticular type III collagen.

This supports the mechanistic story. But a confirmed mechanism and a demonstrated effect in people sit at different levels. As the other items here show, the effect in people has not yet been established in a controlled trial.

Carrying lab and tissue findings across as if they were human effects is the most common leap in this field, so we grade it low.