From the looks of it (given my cursory review of the literature) it seems much closer to the common laser skin treatment approaches (fractional laser) with micro-injuries to stimulate collagen growth… so hot wash clothes won’t do it…
Study design/materials and methods: Six female participants were treated with Tixel© on healthy skin of the dorsal side of the right forearm in a single session with a 600 µm protrusion and 12 milliseconds pulse. The treated area was examined with confocal laser scanning microscopy on day 1, 2, 7, and 14 after treatment. Clinical symptoms were evaluated at the same time-points.
Results: All patients developed erythema and mild edema on the treated areas, which completely disappeared within 14 days. No post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation or scarring was observed. Thermomechanical skin ablation resulted in the formation of homogeneous micro-ablation zones. Two weeks after ablation, the honeycomb patterns of the epidermis in all examined layers was thoroughly restored. Thus, wound-healing was completed.
Conclusions: Wound healing after thermomechanical skin ablation is much faster compared with other fractionated ablation methods. Treatment intervals of 2-4 weeks could be recommended. Lasers Surg. Med. © 2020 The Authors. Lasers in Surgery and Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
and
Comprehensive Review of Thermomechanical Fractional Injury Device: Applications in Medical and Cosmetic Dermatology
Methods: A systematic review of PubMed using the search terms of “Tixel”, “thermomechanical fractional”, [“thermomechanical ablation” and “skin”], and [“thermomechanical ablation” and “dermatology”].
Results: Thirty-six articles matched our inquiry. Fifteen articles did not meet inclusion criteria. Of the remaining 21 articles, eight were related to device-assisted drug delivery, seven related to photoaging, and seven related to scientific/ preclinical exploration. Preclinical studies have shown ablative and non-ablative microchannel formation similar to that of CO₂ laser but without charring, with clinical studies demonstrating efficacy for a wide range of applications including rhytides, hypertrophic scarring, infantile hemangiomas, and acne/rosacea. The treatment is well tolerated with minimal discomfort and downtime, showing promise for pain-averse and pediatric populations. Few adverse events have been reported, with a high degree of safety demonstrated in all Fitzpatrick types.
Limitations: Heterogeneous result reporting among studies. Limited number of randomized controlled trials.
Conclusion: Tixel® is an emerging TMFI device with a wide range of current and potential applications, including device-assisted drug delivery and treatment of rhytides, photoaging, and scars among other conditions. The device has both ablative and non-ablative settings and has been safely used in all Fitzpatrick skin types. Larger and randomized controlled trials are needed to compare this device to current standard of care treatments.