Novel Moisturizing Formulation is Effective for Repairing Skin After Microneedling

Image Credit: © Renata Hamuda - stock.adobe.com

Investigators have observed that a novel moisturizing agent is effective for repairing the skin post-microneedling.¹ The product, which was well-tolerated by patients, reduced transepidermal water loss and erythema while improving texture.

It has been proven that formulations with ceramides improve skin barrier function, reduce inflammation, and promote recovery, especially in wounded skin.² Previous studies have focused on more general wound care, rather than post-procedural skin.

“Accelerating the healing process while restoring the skin's barrier is a key focus in dermatological care, making moisturizers and wound healing products essential for post-injury care,” the authors wrote.

The randomized, double-blind split-face trial included 30 patients between the ages of 22 and 60 years and with Fitzpatrick skin types between I and VI. Those with pre-existing dermatological conditions or known allergies to any ingredients were excluded from this study.

Each participant received a standard session of microneedling with a 1.5 mm needle. The product was applied to 1 side of the face while a vehicle formulation without the actives was applied to the other. Aestura ATOBARRIER 365 Cream has a unique Lipid Complex (UHD DermaON) comprised of ceramides, cholesterol, and fatty acids. These ingredients work together to repair the skin barrier after disruption and damage.

Investigators measured transepidermal water loss, erythema, roughness, and overall barrier recovery at baseline, post-application, week 2, and week 4. VISIA-CR imaging technology confirmed the results. Surveys and questionnaires also confirmed moisturization and overall improvement of the skin based on patient perception.

Regarding transepidermal water loss, the active product showed a 14.2% reduction at week 2 (p < 0.0001, 95% CI [−18.6, −9.81]) and a 15.0% reduction at week 4 (p < 0.0001, 95% CI [−19.3, −10.6]). The vehicle formulation had similar levels of reduction, making the difference between the 2 not statistically significant.

“This improvement is notable given the increased skin permeability typically associated with microneedling, highlighting the formula's role in accelerating skin recovery and restoring barrier function after a dermatologist-administered treatment,” the authors noted.

For erythema, a 1.8% improvement at week 2 (p < 0.0001, 95% CI [−2.55, −1.11]) and a 1.7% improvement at week 4 (p < 0.0001, 95% CI [−2.45, −1.01]) was observed in the active formula. The non-active product showed similar results, which were confirmed via VISIA-CR image analysis. This emphasizes the formula’s ability to calm and soothe the skin after microneedling, with or without active ingredients.

The VISIA-CR analysis also showed that both products lightened the skin and improved overall tone by up to 9% in the weeks following the procedure. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 formulations, but the pigmentation effects became more pronounced over time when compared to baseline.

Roughness decreased by 0.6% at week 2 (p = 0.0460, 95% CI [−1.13, −0.007]) and 0.7% at week 4 (p = 0.0126, 95% CI [−1.23, −0.11]) in the active product, which was very notable compared to untreated post-microneedling skin. The vehicle cream showed a slightly lesser reduction.

Patients were very satisfied with the active formulation with a 93% approval rating compared to 90% for the non-active product. Most participants believed their skin was adequately hydrated, as the skin felt more moisturized with less irritation and erythema post-procedure. No adverse events, irritations, or allergic reactions were reported in either therapy.

The small sample size, short follow-up period, and lack of a typical control group may be considered potential study limitations. A more traditional control vehicle with no moisturizing properties can better define the efficacy of the Aestura ATOBARRIER 365 Cream. Further research can determine if this product is suitable for other conditions like rosacea, psoriasis, and atopic dermatitis. Additionally, this literature can assess for efficacy longer than 4 weeks post-treatment, especially in more diverse patient populations.

Although both treatments were effective and well-received, the active product showed better results in improving the skin texture. Clinical analysis and patient reporting aligned for the entire trial.

“The significant reductions in TEWL, erythema, and roughness highlight its ability to restore the skin's barrier, calm irritation, and refine texture. These findings confirm its role in supporting skin recovery and resilience after dermatological treatments, making it a valuable addition to post-procedure care,” the authors concluded.

References

1. Nawaz T, Shin J, Shieh M, Yoo JY. A Split-Face Micro-Needling Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Consumer Perception of a Novel Moisturization Agent. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2025;24(3):e70109. doi:10.1111/jocd.70109

2. Spada, F., Harrison, I. P., Barnes, T. M., Greive, K. A., Daniels, D., Townley, J. P., ... & Shumack, S. (2021). A daily regimen of a ceramide‐dominant moisturizing cream and cleanser restores the skin permeability barrier in adults with moderate eczema: a randomized trial. Dermatologic Therapy, 34(4), e14970.