Projections show that the global market for aesthetic injectables could grow by 12 to 14 percent annually over the next five years, driven by the demand for minimally invasive treatments. This trend underscores the growing preference for non-surgical aesthetic solutions, especially for skin rejuvenation.
Among the most talked-about options in this space are Ejal 40 and Profhilo. Both are renowned for their safety, effectiveness, and ability to rejuvenate the skin, but they cater to slightly different needs and use unique formulations.
This article will compare Ejal 40 vs Profhilo, their unique formulations, mechanisms of action, specific indications, and differences in treatment protocols.
Key Takeaways
- Ejal 40 is marketed as a skin booster, focusing on hydration and revitalization.
- Profhilo stands out for its innovative bio-remodeling properties, targeting deeper tissue rejuvenation.
- Ejal 40 requires three sessions spaced one month apart, with maintenance as needed.
- Profhilo involves two initial sessions one month apart, followed by maintenance every six months.
- Ejal 40 lacks published online clinical studies, highlighting the need for more evidence to validate its safety and efficacy.
- Profhilo’s well-documented clinical and post-marketing data support its effectiveness and high safety profile.
- Both treatments are generally well-tolerated, with mild side effects such as swelling, redness, or tenderness that usually resolve within a few days to a week.
About: Medica Depot is your trusted all-in-one supplier, offering a range of high-quality medical injectables and supplies. Order Ejal 40 online at Medica Depot today! Whether for health professionals, plastic surgeons, dermatologists, licensed estheticians, or other specialists, we can offer genuine, brand-name products you may need. With Medica Depot, we prioritize serving you better to improve the patient’s quality of life.
Understanding Ejal 40 and Profhilo
Skin boosters represent a revolutionary approach in dermatology, offering benefits that extend beyond traditional hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers. According to Yi et al. (2024), skin boosters effectively enhance skin hydration, elasticity, and overall texture, making them a popular choice for non-surgical rejuvenation. Among these, Ejal 40 and Profhilo have gained significant attention for their unique formulations and results.
Ejal 40 is a bio-revitalizing gel that combines high molecular weight hyaluronic acid with a 40mg/2ml concentration. In contrast, Profhilo is a cutting-edge injectable known for its bio-remodeling properties. It features a patented hybrid HA formulation with both low- and high-molecular-weight hyaluronic acids.
While both treatments share a foundation in HA, their formulations, applications, and target outcomes differ, catering to diverse patient needs and aesthetic goals.
Formulation and Mechanism of Action
Ejal 40’s formulation focuses on bio-revitalization through a high molecular weight HA concentration of 40mg/2ml. Its primary action involves fortifying the extracellular matrix by activating fibroblasts. This targeted stimulation encourages collagen and elastin production, providing localized improvements in skin hydration, elasticity, and texture. Its mechanism is particularly effective for addressing early signs of aging and subtle skin concerns.
On the other hand, Profhilo’s innovative formulation relies on a patented NAHYCO technology, which blends low- and high-molecular-weight HAs into a stabilized hybrid structure. This technology enables Profhilo to act as a hydrator and a bio-remodeler, diffusing uniformly beneath the skin for more comprehensive tissue regeneration. Its extended activity makes it suitable for more advanced concerns like skin laxity and pronounced wrinkles.
Indications and Treatment Protocols
Ejal 40 addresses concerns such as loss of radiance, uneven skin texture, and early signs of facial aging like wrinkles. It is particularly suitable for adults seeking revitalization, volumization, and overall skin enhancement.
- Ejal 40 Treatment Protocol: This skin booster procedure involves three sessions spaced one month apart, followed by maintenance sessions, depending on the degree of aging. Ejal 40 injections are administered using the 4 Bio Revitalization Points (4 BRP) technique.
Meanwhile, Profhilo primarily targets aging, skin laxity, and sagging tissue. While commonly used on the face and neck, Profhilo’s versatility allows it to address other areas prone to aging, such as the décolletage, hands, arms, knees, and abdomen. This makes it an excellent choice for patients seeking a broader, full-body rejuvenation.
- Profhilo Treatment Protocol: This typically requires two initial sessions spaced one month apart, with maintenance every six months to sustain results. Its administration follows the 5 Bio Aesthetic Points (BAP) technique, which ensures precise delivery to areas of maximum effectiveness for tissue remodeling and hydration.
Efficacy and Clinical Studies
Unfortunately, there are no clinical studies available for Ejal 40 online. This skin booster requires further clinical evidence to highlight its safety and efficacy in revitalizing skin. Fortunately, several patients have shared their Ejal 40 before and after photos to showcase its improvements in facial skin enhancements.
Meanwhile, the overall number of reports on the adverse effects of Profhilo is very low, which supports its high tolerability and safety. After three years of post-marketing experience, this medical device’s safety profile remains favorable and aligns with the product information.
Safety Profiles and Potential Side Effects
While both Ejal 40 and Profhilo injections offer a favorable safety profile, individuals need to understand the common reactions that may occur post-treatment.
- Typical Ejal 40 Side Effects: Mild swelling, redness, bruising, or tenderness.
- Typical Profhilo Side Effects: Temporary swelling, redness, and tenderness.
These reactions are often temporary and may resolve within a few days to a week. When these persist, or unexpected side effects occur, individuals must seek immediate medical attention for prompt action and appropriate management.
Expected Outcomes and Longevity of Results
When choosing between Ejal 40 and Profhilo for aesthetic enhancements, it’s essential to understand their expected outcomes and the longevity of their results. Both treatments are effective in enhancing skin appearance and quality, with results typically lasting 6 to 9 months, offering similar benefits in terms of duration and rejuvenation.
Patients have also shared their before-and-after results with Ejal 40 and Profhilo, which can help interested patients determine which procedure can address their specific concerns.
Conclusion
Ejal 40 and Profhilo each offer unique benefits for skin rejuvenation. While Ejal 40 shows promise as a skin booster, further clinical evidence is needed to fully establish its efficacy. Profhilo, with its well-documented safety profile, remains a trusted choice among practitioners and patients.
Ultimately, the best option depends on individual skin concerns and goals. A consultation with a qualified aesthetic practitioner is essential to determine the most suitable treatment for achieving personalized facial rejuvenation outcomes.
FAQs
1. What are Ejal 40 and Profhilo?
Ejal 40 and Profhilo are non-surgical aesthetic injectables used for skin rejuvenation. Ejal 40 is marketed as a skin booster that revitalizes skin texture and elasticity, while Profhilo is known for its bio-remodeling properties, targeting skin laxity and aging.
2. How do the treatment protocols differ for Ejal 40 and Profhilo?
Ejal 40 requires three sessions spaced one month apart, whereas Profhilo involves two initial sessions spaced one month apart. Both may require maintenance sessions afterward to sustain results.
3. What are the safety profiles of Ejal 40 and Profhilo?
Ejal 40 lacks published clinical studies on safety and efficacy, so it needs further evidence for validation. In contrast, Profhilo has a favorable safety profile supported by years of post-marketing experience, indicating high tolerability.
References
- Leclerc, O., Peters, N., Scaglione, A., & Waring, J. (2021, December 20). From extreme to mainstream: The future of aesthetics injectables | McKinsey. Www.mckinsey.com. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/life-sciences/our-insights/from-extreme-to-mainstream-the-future-of-aesthetics-injectables
- Cassuto, D., Delledonne, M., Zaccaria, G., Illiano, I., Giori, A. M., & Bellia, G. (2020). Safety Assessment of High- and Low-Molecular-Weight Hyaluronans (Profhilo®) as Derived from Worldwide Postmarketing Data. BioMed research international, 2020, 8159047. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8159047
