Collagen Boosters in Daegu — Where “It Increases Collagen” Was Measured in People

The conclusion, first

“Where in Daegu is good at collagen boosters?” is a question that cannot be settled from public data. So we write a different answer instead — we set out how far the sentence “it increases collagen” has been verified in people. Within the range we checked there are three points. First, the sample in the first report that liquid polycaprolactone makes collagen in human tissue was two patients (biopsy 13 months after injection, no control group). Second, the larger follow-up study was also 13 people at a single clinic, and what that study measured as its primary outcome was not the amount of collagen but “dermal thickness” — at one year the biopsy thickness had increased by 26.74% ± 9.26% (1,412 µm → 1,781 µm, p < 0.001). Third, the site that was biopsied was not the face but the temple. That is because the right temple was left untreated and used as a within-person control. So we do not tell you “your collagen will increase several-fold”; we tell you as it stands what was measured, in how many people, and in which class.

The order we actually work through in consultation

1. We begin by saying that “collagen booster” is not one category

Under this one name sit materials that are entirely different from one another — polycaprolactone (PCL), polylactic acid family (PLLA · PDLLA), calcium hydroxylapatite (CaHA), polynucleotides (PN), human-derived acellular dermal matrix (hADM). All they have in common is the explanation that they “make the body react”; the material, the route of breakdown and the way of reversing it all differ. The situation class by class we have written out in the things called collagen boosters and comparing types of skin booster in Daegu.

2. We put what has been verified in human tissue into a table

The column worth looking at in the table is the right-hand one. We could not find a human study that quantified “collagen increased” as an amount of collagen. There is a histological observation that “new collagen can be seen around the particles” (2 people) and a measurement that the thickness increased (13 people), and these two are different claims. An increase in thickness includes components other than collagen, as well as cells and vessels — indeed that study wrote that fibroblasts · giant cells · new capillaries · new collagen · elastic fibres were seen together around the particles.

3. We say what it means that the sample is small

Two people and 13 people do not mean “this is wrong”; they mean “the precision is low.” A biopsy involves cutting into a person, so the sample is hard to enlarge, and histological material in this field is generally small. What we take issue with is not the fact that the sample is small, but the fact that it disappears from the promotional copy. We think a judgement needs to be told, alongside the phrase “clinically proven,” that behind it stand 2 people · 13 people · 20 people · 30 people.

4. We look together at whether there is a way of reversing it

The classes that increase collagen are on the whole hard to reverse. Hyaluronic acid dissolves with an enzyme, but for the other classes the situation is different. In an experiment on the facial arteries of human cadavers, calcium hydroxylapatite did not dissolve with sodium thiosulfate, nor with sodium thiosulfate and hyaluronidase used together. Microsphere polycaprolactone dissolved within five minutes in collagenase alone (this is not material on use in the body). We could not find a primary trial of any agent for reversing PN · PDLLA · PLLA · hADM. So we do not give the explanation that “if you do not like it, it can just be dissolved.”

5. We say that the source of the session and interval figures differs by class

The widely circulating “three sessions at four-week intervals” has a different source in each class — for one it is the approval documentation, for another an expert consensus, for another the manufacturer’s own copy (where the default is in fact a single session), for another a trial protocol, and for some classes we could not find the source at all. We could not find primary literature explaining how this figure travelled from class to class. The detailed comparison we have set out in a table in comparing types of skin booster in Daegu.

6. So this is the order we decide in

(1) We separate out whether the goal is thickness, volume or texture → (2) for each candidate class we tell you what was measured in people and in how many of them → (3) we check together whether there is a way of reversing it → (4) items that have not been verified (dose · number of sessions · duration) we say have not been verified → (5) and on top of that we decide together. Price and discounts enter nowhere in this order; costs are explained separately at the consultation.

Five things worth asking at a consultation

These are questions you can ask at any clinic. If the answers are specific and the place says it does not know what it does not know, that helps a judgement.

1. “How many people is the human data for that product?” — starting with whether it is animal or in-vitro material or human material.
2. “What was the increase in collagen verified with?” — whether by biopsy, by a thickness measurement or by photographic assessment.
3. “Where is the basis for the volume injected per session?” — depending on the class, there are cases in which no primary source exists.
4. “If something goes wrong, is there a way of reversing it?” — for many classes there is not, and the accurate place is the one that says so.
5. “If there is a reason not to recommend it for me, what is it?” — an explanation that does not state the conditions under which it would not be recommended is not material for a judgement.

What is confirmed / what is inferred / what we could not confirm / material pointing the other way

Where this article was written

• Miso Clinic, Daegu · 4F Bombom Building, 125 Dongdeok-ro, Jung-gu, Daegu, Republic of Korea (near Kyungpook National University Hospital station)
• Director Lee Chi-Hak · Tel. 053-428-2700
• This column was written by the director and reviewed in September 2026.

This article was written not to recommend a particular treatment but to set out the extent of the data needed for a decision. Judgement about an individual condition requires examination, and this article does not substitute for medical care. As companion pieces it helps to read comparing types of skin booster in Daegu and choosing a skin firmness treatment in Daegu.

Frequently asked questions

Who wrote this

References

1. First human tissue report for liquid polycaprolactone — Kim JA, Van Abel D, Journal of Cosmetic and Laser Therapy 2015;17(2):99–101, PMID 25260139, DOI 10.3109/14764172.2014.968586. A pilot study of 2 patients · no control group. Biopsy 13 months after intradermal injection confirmed collagen formation around the particles, with the particles retaining their original state. It is a report of the character of confirming an earlier rabbit tissue study in people.
2. Biopsy study of increased dermal thickness — Kim JS, Aesthetic Surgery Journal 2019;39(12):NP484–NP494, PMID 30778526, DOI 10.1093/asj/sjz050. 13 people · single clinic · prospective. 0.5 cc of diluted polycaprolactone injected once into the facial dermis, with the right temple as an untreated within-person control. At one year, temple biopsies (117 points) showed a thickness increase of 26.74% ± 9.26% (1,412.41 ± 69 µm → 1,781.11 ± 110 µm, p < 0.001) and facial skin thickness by ultrasound an increase of 21.31% ± 4.34%. Three people had additional biopsies at two weeks and at four years. Around the particles, fibroblasts · giant cells · new capillaries · new collagen · elastic fibres were observed. A single author · a single institution · not randomised.
3. Human trial of human-derived acellular dermal matrix — Lee YI, Chau NH, Nguyen NH, Ham S, Baek Y, Kim J, Lee JH, International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2026;27(5):2193. 20 people · 20 weeks · split-face double-blind, hyaluronic acid control. The paper records the product anonymously (phADM), and the volume injected per session is nowhere to be found — not in the paper, not in the registry, not in the manufacturer’s material.
4. PCL against PN — Jeong GJ et al., Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology 2020;19(7):1593–1599. 30 people. No significant difference between the groups. A trial making the same comparison at a scale of 218 people (Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology 2025;24(1):e16576) was retracted on the ground of a misstatement of the constituents of the product used.
5. PDLLA against PLLA — Park JY et al., Skin Research and Technology 2026, DOI 10.1111/srt.70324. 33 people. The degrees of improvement were similar between them.
6. Calcium hydroxylapatite did not dissolve — Yankova M et al., Aesthetic Surgery Journal 2021;41(5):NP226–NP236. In an experiment on human cadaveric facial arteries it did not dissolve with sodium thiosulfate alone, nor with sodium thiosulfate and hyaluronidase in combination. This is a cadaveric experiment, so it may differ from the result in the living.
7. Dissolution of microsphere polycaprolactone — Wu L, Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology 2025;24:e70201. Dissolved within five minutes in collagenase alone. This is not material on use in the body.
8. Legislation on medical advertising — Article 56(2) of the Korean Medical Service Act. It prohibits advertising by means of accounts of treatment experience, comparison with other medical institutions, superlative expressions and the like. This is why this column carries no expressions such as “good at” or “the best,” no comparison with other medical institutions, and no prices or discounts.