One of the questions patients interested in skin rejuvenation and non-surgical skin tightening treatments most frequently ask me is: “Which is better: Exion RF, Morpheus8 or Scarlet S?”
In fact, there is no single correct answer to this question. This is because, in aesthetic medicine, no single device is the best option for every patient. Skin type, age, expectations, the time required to return to normal daily life, and the specific issue to be treated are the most important factors in determining which technology is most suitable.
Nevertheless, people often ask why I chose the Exion platform when making an investment in my own clinic that will span many years. I did not base this decision solely on technical specifications. I spoke to colleagues using different radiofrequency technologies, reviewed scientific studies, assessed the long-term performance of the devices, and also took into account the technical support and training infrastructure available in Turkey as part of my decision-making process.
In the end, I opted for Exion. This was not because the other technologies had failed; rather, it was because I believed Exion to be the platform best suited to my own approach to treatment and my patients’ expectations.
In this article, rather than disparaging the Exion RF, Morpheus8 and Scarlet S technologies or presenting one as superior to the others, I will share, in complete transparency, the criteria I use as a plastic surgeon when selecting a device and why I have chosen Exion.
What Did I Look for When Choosing Equipment as a Plastic Surgeon?
Purchasing an aesthetic device does not simply mean acquiring a new piece of technology. It also means investing in a treatment platform that will be used for years to come and determining the quality of the service to be provided to patients. For this reason, when selecting a device, I did not base my decision solely on promotional videos or marketing claims.
Before making a decision, I spoke to colleagues who use different radio-frequency technologies, reviewed scientific publications and listened to long-term user experiences. In addition to the device’s technical specifications, the manufacturer’s reliability, technical support network, training support and long-term approach in Turkey were also important criteria for me.
Ultimately, I opted for the Exion platform. This was not because the other devices had failed, but because I believed that Exion was the technology best suited to my approach to treatment and my patients’ expectations.
The main reason I chose Exion: it supports hyaluronic acid production
Boosting collagen and elastin production is a common goal of many radiofrequency technologies today. One of the things that sets the Exion platform apart, in my view, is its technological approach, which aims to support hyaluronic acid production as well.
Hyaluronic acid is one of the most important building blocks that helps the skin retain moisture, appear plumper and maintain its elasticity. As we age, levels of this substance naturally decline, and dryness, fine lines and loss of volume become more pronounced.
For this reason, a technology that aims not only to firm the skin but also to support skin quality and moisture balance aligns more closely with my treatment approach. This was one of the main reasons why I chose Exion.
The Second Reason I Chose Exion: How Exion Face and Exion RF Complement Each Other
One of the main reasons I chose the Exion platform was that it does not consist of just a single device. Exion Face and Exion RF, both part of the same platform, are two technologies developed to address different needs and can be used to complement one another where necessary.
In my own practice, I view these two treatments not as competitors, but as complementary procedures. I usually administer the Exion Face treatment to my patients, particularly during the summer months when sun exposure is more intense. In the autumn and winter months, however, depending on the patient’s needs, I prefer to take skin rejuvenation to the next level by adding Exion RF (microneedle radiofrequency) treatment.
Thanks to this approach, I am able to offer my patients a longer-term skin rejuvenation programme, tailored to the seasons and the skin’s needs, rather than a one-off treatment. In my view, it is precisely this personalised planning that lies at the heart of successful results.
Is Exion RF Less Painful?
I am asked this question quite often. To be honest, many of my patients who have undergone treatment with different devices say they find the Exion RF treatment more comfortable. However, as pain perception varies from person to person, I do not think it is right to make definitive judgements about any particular device.
In my experience, when an appropriate anaesthetic cream is applied, Exion RF treatment is well tolerated by the majority of patients. In particular, some patients who have previously undergone other microneedle radiofrequency treatments report feeling more comfortable during Exion RF treatment.
The redness observed following treatment also lasts for a shorter time than expected in most patients. In my own practice, I have observed that, particularly after the first session, the redness usually subsides noticeably within a few hours. Although this duration may be slightly longer in subsequent sessions, depending on the individual, most patients are able to return to their daily lives within a short time.
What Should We Expect from Exion?
The most common misconception I encounter regarding energy-based skin rejuvenation technologies is the belief that these devices will produce a noticeable lifting effect, similar to that of a surgical facelift. In reality, the primary aim of these treatments is to slow down the skin’s biological ageing process, support collagen and elastin production, and improve skin quality in the long term.
Of course, a noticeable improvement and firming can be observed in many patients. In particular, I have achieved results in the jawline and double chin area that have even surprised me in some of my patients. Nevertheless, it is not correct to expect the same degree of lifting effect in every patient. The structure of the skin, age, genetic characteristics and lifestyle directly influence the outcome.
That is why I always tell my patients: your expectations of Exion treatment should not be limited to a facelift. The real aim is to achieve skin that looks better quality, healthier and more vibrant, and where the ageing process progresses more slowly. In my view, this perspective also significantly increases satisfaction with the treatment.
The Results That Impressed Me the Most
As a doctor who has been carrying out energy-based skin rejuvenation treatments for many years, some of the results can really surprise me. In particular, the definition of the jawline and the tightening of the double chin area in some older patients have yielded results that exceeded my expectations.
However, it is not these changes that have really impressed me. What really matters is that, over time, the skin looks healthier, retains its elasticity better and the signs of ageing progress more slowly. Unfortunately, it is not possible to fully demonstrate this effect without comparing two different future scenarios for the same person: one where they have undergone treatment and one where they have not.
For this reason, I see Exion not just as a way to ‘look younger today’, but also as an investment that helps my skin age better in the future.
Is Exion the Right Choice for Every Patient?
No. In aesthetic medicine, it is not possible to say that a single device is the best option for every patient. Whilst laser treatments may be more suitable for some patients, microneedle radiofrequency or other technologies may yield more successful results for others. What matters is not the name of the device, but determining the correct indication.
For this reason, during the consultation, I assess not only the current condition of the skin, but also the patient’s age, lifestyle, how soon they wish to resume their social life, any previous procedures they have undergone, and their expectations of the treatment. I then draw up the treatment plan accordingly.
Whilst Exion Face alone is sometimes sufficient, in some patients adding Exion RF may be a more appropriate approach. In certain cases, however, it may be far more appropriate to recommend entirely different methods rather than energy-based treatments. What matters to me is not applying the same treatment to every patient, but determining the most appropriate treatment for that particular patient.
Conclusion: Why Did I Choose the Exion Platform?
If I were to make a choice again today, I would still opt for the Exion platform. This is not due to any single technical feature alone; it is because of its scientific foundation, patient comfort, its approach to supporting hyaluronic acid production, and the fact that Exion Face and Exion RF complement each other within the same treatment plan.
However, I would like to emphasise in particular that a successful outcome does not depend solely on the equipment used. The right patient selection, realistic expectations, an appropriate treatment plan and the experience of the doctor performing the procedure are just as important as the technology itself.
In my own practice, my aim is to draw up treatment plans for my patients with an eye not only to the present but also to the years ahead. This is because, in my view, a successful skin rejuvenation treatment should be judged not merely by the changes visible when looking in the mirror, but by its contribution to the skin ageing more healthily over the years.
