Fraxel
Non-ablative fractional 1550/1927 nm · Fraxel Dual
Fraxel is the brand that made 'fractional' a household word, and it stays in circulation through celebrity dermatologists and 'Fraxel recovery' videos, even as lighter thulium lasers take the younger end of the market.
Search interest: about 150 searches a month in Singapore for “fraxel laser” (Ahrefs, October 2026).
It trades depth for recovery, which is the right trade for most faces and the wrong one for deep scars.
Reviewed against the Aesthetics International standard. Category: Lasers.
Does Fraxel work?
Established. It trades depth for recovery, which is the right trade for most faces and the wrong one for deep scars. Non-ablative fractional 1550 nm has good evidence for acne scars and moderate evidence for photoageing, with systematic reviews and a 2026 meta-analysis finding smaller improvement than CO₂ per session but far less downtime and pigment risk.
- Verdict
- Established Long clinical track record. Results depend on selection and technique more than on the device.
- Evidence base
- 4 PubMed-indexed studies cited below, including systematic reviews, randomised trials.
- Suits
- Sun spots, uneven tone and early photoageing; shallow acne scars and fine lines in people who prefer a course of short recoveries to one long one.
- Not for
- Deep scars or laxity that need ablative or structural work. Active melasma treated at high energy. Recent tanning.
- In Singapore
- Fraxel Dual is HSA-registered and doctor-operated in Singapore.
- Category
- Lasers · about 150 searches a month in Singapore for “fraxel laser”
- Reviewed
- 1 October 2026 by Aesthetics International. Revised as evidence and regulation change.
What it is
Fraxel Dual combines two non-ablative wavelengths: 1550 nm, which heats narrow columns into the mid-dermis for scars and wrinkles, and 1927 nm, which treats the upper dermis and epidermis for pigment and sun damage. Nothing is vapourised; the columns of heated tissue are shed over days as fine bronzed flakes.
How it works
Fractional photothermolysis, described in 2004, creates thousands of microscopic thermal zones surrounded by untouched skin, which repairs them quickly. Energy sets the depth of each column and density sets how much skin is treated per pass. A typical plan is three to five sessions a month apart. Between providers the differences are the energy and density chosen, the balance of 1550 and 1927, and whether pigment-prone skin is prepared first.
What the evidence says
Non-ablative fractional 1550 nm has good evidence for acne scars and moderate evidence for photoageing, with systematic reviews and a 2026 meta-analysis finding smaller improvement than CO₂ per session but far less downtime and pigment risk. The 1927 nm wavelength has multicentre trial data for facial photopigmentation. For melasma, meta-analyses report short-term lightening with a meaningful recurrence rate, so it is used cautiously at low energy. Much of the early literature was manufacturer-supported, and head-to-head trials against newer thulium and picosecond lasers are few.
What people are saying
Paraphrased from public discussion on TikTok, Instagram, Reddit and in the press. Not testimonials, and not about any one clinic. Reported in: realself.com, thezoereport.com.
What the studies show
- RCT
The original description of fractional photothermolysis showed that microscopic thermal zones heal rapidly from surrounding skin with measurable dermal remodelling.
Fractional photothermolysis: a new concept for cutaneous remodeling using microscopic patterns of thermal injury. — Lasers Surg Med, 2004. PMID 15216537.
- systematic review
CO₂ produced somewhat greater scar improvement per session, while non-ablative erbium-glass had fewer adverse effects and shorter downtime.
Efficacy and Safety of Er:Glass versus CO(2) Lasers in the Treatment of Atrophic Acne Scars: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. — Aesthetic Plast Surg, 2026. PMID 41364211.
- cohort
A multicentre trial reported improvement in facial photopigmentation after a course of 1927 nm treatments with transient side effects.
Nonablative 1927 nm fractional resurfacing for the treatment of facial photopigmentation. — J Drugs Dermatol, 2014. PMID 25607696.
- systematic review
Lasers, including non-ablative fractional types, lightened melasma in the short term, with recurrence and post-inflammatory darkening as recurring limitations.
Laser therapy in the treatment of melasma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. — Lasers Med Sci, 2022. PMID 35122202.
Studies are selected for relevance and quality, not for agreement with the verdict; PubMed records are linked so the reader can check them.
Who it suits
Suits
Sun spots, uneven tone and early photoageing; shallow acne scars and fine lines in people who prefer a course of short recoveries to one long one.
Not for
Deep scars or laxity that need ablative or structural work. Active melasma treated at high energy. Recent tanning.
Alternatives
The two reviewed treatments most often weighed against Fraxel, on the same standard.
| Fraxel | Fractional CO₂ resurfacing | Pico laser | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Verdict | Established | Established | Vetted |
| What it is | Fraxel Dual combines two non-ablative wavelengths: 1550 nm, which heats narrow columns into the mid-dermis for scars and wrinkles, and 1927 nm, which treats the upper dermis and epidermis for pigment and sun damage. | A 10,600 nm carbon dioxide laser vapourises columns of skin in a grid, leaving intact skin between them to speed healing. | A picosecond laser delivers energy in pulses a thousand times shorter than the nanosecond lasers that came before it. |
| Evidence base | 4 PubMed-indexed studies cited below, including systematic reviews, randomised trials. | 4 PubMed-indexed studies cited below, including systematic reviews. | 4 PubMed-indexed studies cited below, including systematic reviews. |
| Suits | Sun spots, uneven tone and early photoageing; shallow acne scars and fine lines in people who prefer a course of short recoveries to one long one. | Atrophic acne scars, etched lines around the mouth and eyes, sun-damaged texture and surgical scars in people who can take a week of visible recovery. | Sun spots, freckles, post-acne marks, tattoo ink, uneven tone in Asian skin when energy is set conservatively. |
| In one line | It trades depth for recovery, which is the right trade for most faces and the wrong one for deep scars. | The laser is a controlled injury; the skill is choosing how deep and how dense for this skin, not how much the machine can do. | The variable that matters is depth, not brightness, and pigment already deposited is only half the problem; the inflammation producing it is the other half. |
Risks
Swelling, redness and bronzed flaking for several days, acne or cold-sore flares, and post-inflammatory darkening in darker skin, especially after dense 1927 nm passes.
In Singapore
Fraxel Dual is HSA-registered and doctor-operated in Singapore. The non-ablative 1540 nm laser in our Luminescence Laser Lift and the thulium laser in FSX are the same family of fractional non-ablative devices on other platforms.
“It trades depth for recovery, which is the right trade for most faces and the wrong one for deep scars.”
Vetted protocols on the same problem
Questions
Is Fraxel ablative?
How many sessions?
Fraxel or pico laser for pigment?
Cite this review
Aesthetics International (2026). Fraxel: does it work? Evidence, risks and verdict. https://aesthetics-international.org/treatments/fraxel-non-ablative/ (reviewed 1 October 2026).
Editorial, unpaid and independent of any manufacturer. Verdict: Established. See what works and what doesn't across all 153 reviews. Spotted an error or a newer study? Suggest a correction — changes are logged on the corrections page. Terms are defined in the glossary.
Have a question about this treatment?
Ask us — or ask to be matched with a practitioner in Singapore who follows evidence-based treatment. Whether it is right for you is decided at an in-person assessment, not by a review; sometimes the answer is a different treatment, or none.
WhatsApp +65 8023 7170Suggest a treatment to review
Physicians, manufacturers and readers can propose a treatment for review. Reviews are editorial and are not paid for.
[email protected]