Rejuran in Daegu: which skin suits it
Rejuran is not a volumiser. It targets dermal density, texture and the repair environment. That makes the suitable skin fairly clear — and the unsuitable skin just as clear. What the human trials consistently moved was not the wrinkle grade but roughness, pore volume, elasticity and hydration. This page sets that out as a table.
The short answer
Rejuran is a candidate when the skin has become thin, rough and open-pored. In a 27-subject split-face trial the subjective aesthetic scales (VAS, GAIS) showed no difference from the control, while improvement rates for roughness, pore volume, elasticity and hydration were higher on the PN side. It is not an answer for hollow cheeks or a descending jawline — finishing every session will not deliver the change you wanted.
Four axes we actually look at
The product name comes after these four, not before.
- Has the dermis thinned? Light no longer reflects, makeup sits badly, fine lines have set in.
- Has volume been lost? A shadow falls in one area, and a groove stays when you are not smiling.
- Is there descent? The jawline blurs and things sit lower.
- Is the barrier broken? Frequent redness, stinging, tightness.
Rejuran answers 1 and 4, and does not answer 2 and 3. Starting a course while this distinction is blurred is what leaves disappointment at the end.
Suitability at a glance
| State | Verdict | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Thin, rough skin with open pores | Candidate | The axis where the 27-subject trial showed higher improvement than control |
| Fine lines and dryness around eyes and mouth | Candidate | The area the pivotal trials actually treated (crow's feet) |
| Frequently red, reactive skin | Conditional | No foreign-body reaction is used, so the burden is lower. No direct comparative data |
| Recovery support after lasers or procedures | Conditional | Reports are at case-series level with no control group |
| Hollow cheeks casting a shadow | Not a candidate | Not designed to add volume |
| Jawline descent | Not a candidate | Targets dermal measures; not a lifting mechanism |
| Irreversible material already in the area | Hold | PCL, PLLA and CaHA are not dissolved by hyaluronidase, making later attribution difficult |
| An important event within two or three days | Hold | Bumps and erythema may persist — 13.3% to 56.7% depending on formulation |
Choosing a formulation
We could not find a trial comparing the three formulations under the same conditions, so what follows is conditions, not superiority.
- If pain is the main worry — a formulation containing lidocaine. In the 2025 15-subject trial, formulation design moved pain VAS from 5.04 to 3.39.
- If it must not show afterwards — hyaluronic acid-containing formulations tend to leave less elevation. In the same trial, embossing was 56.7% versus 13.3%.
- Thin areas such as the periocular region — depth and volume per point decide the result here. Technique matters more than formulation.
Composition and labelling per formulation are on the Rejuran product page.
When another family fits better
- Skin so thin that material itself feels missing — we also consider the hADM family (Re2O, CellREDM).
- Raising density evenly across the whole face — liquid PCL (GOURI) becomes a candidate.
- Hydration and an immediate change — the crosslinked HA family (BYRYZN) is the only one reversible with hyaluronidase.
- Descent as the main problem — not a booster but radiofrequency lifting (XERF, Density).
There is no data to rank these families, because no trial has compared two of them in the same people under the same conditions. Comparison tables circulating online are mostly clinic marketing, not clinical data.
Frequently asked
How do I know if my skin is thin?
We assess it in person: how light reflects, how makeup sits, whether fine lines persist independently of movement, whether pores have elongated. We do not decide on device readings alone.
Does it help pores?
In the 27-subject split-face trial, improvement in pore volume was higher than control. The sample was small and the subjective scales showed no difference, so the accurate reading is “texture settles” rather than “pores disappear”.
Is it suitable for reactive skin?
We regard the burden as lower because no foreign-body reaction is involved. We could not find data comparing it with other families in reactive skin. If redness is active we settle that first.
At what age should I start?
Not by age, but by how much the dermis has thinned. Two people of the same age differ widely, and there is no trial data using age as the criterion.
Winter or summer?
We know of no data showing the season changes the result. Sun protection is needed afterwards in any season.
Can I have just one session?
You can, but one session is hard to judge from. The pivotal trials all used multi-session designs and change is rarely noticeable after the first. That said, there is no trial evidence for any particular number.
Is it better combined with GOURI?
We found no trial data on combining them. Separating area or timing makes it possible, but GOURI is irreversible material, so order and interval are decided first.
How long does it last?
Follow-up in the pivotal trials ends 12 weeks after the last session. No trial observed the one-year mark, so “lasts a year” is an estimate, not a measurement.
Read next
Who wrote this
Lee Chi-Hak, Director, Miso Clinic Daegu
4F Bombom Building, 125 Dongdeok-ro, Jung-gu, Daegu, Korea (Exit 1, Kyungpook National University Hospital Station)
+82-53-428-2700 · www.clinicmiso.co.kr
References
- Lee YJ, et al. Comparison of the effects of polynucleotide and hyaluronic acid fillers on periocular rejuvenation: a randomized, double-blind, split-face trial. J Dermatolog Treat. 2022;33(1):254-260. PMID 32248707 (27 subjects, three sessions at two-week intervals; no difference on VAS or GAIS; higher improvement in roughness, pore volume, elasticity and hydration; dermal density not different)
- Jeon W, et al. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2025;50(7):2723-2730. PMID 41361144 (15 subjects; pain VAS 3.39 vs 5.04 p<0.005, embossing 13.3% vs 56.7%, erythema 40% vs 60%; CFGS and GAIS not different)
- Lampridou S, et al. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2025;24(2):e16721. PMID 39645667 (9 studies, 219 patients, low to moderate quality)
- Jeong GJ, et al. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2020;19(7):1593-1599. PMID 31680395 (30 subjects, compared with PCL; no difference at 12 weeks)
- Pak CS, et al. J Korean Med Sci. 2014;29(Suppl 3):S201-S209. PMID 25473210 — Retracted Publication
What we could not verify
- A trial comparing Healer, HB and HB Plus under the same conditions.
- Human data split by skin thickness, age or area.
- Comparative data in reactive skin against other families.
- Any trial directly comparing PN with hADM or liquid PCL — none exists.
- Follow-up beyond 12 weeks.
This is general medical information and does not replace consultation. Indications and methods depend on individual skin condition and should be decided after an in-person consultation. Prices and promotions are not covered.
← Clinical columns · Reference library · Miso Clinic Daegu
한국어 · English