Dynamic Vector Remodeling™: A New Dimension in Facial Rejuvenation Through The Mirelle Method™

The Science of Structural Dual-Mode Radiofrequency Remodeling and Precision Neuromodulation

Conceived and developed by Corina M. Ianculovici, DNP, FAAMFM, ABAAM-HP, AGNP

Founder, Mirelle Institute for Longevity & Regenerative Medicine

October 2026

Beyond Skin Tightening: Understanding the Forces That Shape the Aging Face

What if the next advancement in nonsurgical facial rejuvenation isn't simply about producing more collagen, but also about understanding the muscular forces influencing facial expression and contour while the skin undergoes remodeling?

This question forms the foundation of Dynamic Vector Remodeling™, an original clinical treatment concept conceived and developed by Dr. Corina M. Ianculovici at Mirelle Institute for Longevity & Regenerative Medicine.

Developed under The Mirelle Method™, Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ integrates Density® sequential monopolar-bipolar radiofrequency with precision neuromodulation administered immediately following the radiofrequency treatment.

The approach is designed to address two interconnected contributors to facial aging within one coordinated clinical strategy:

1. Structural remodeling: Controlled radiofrequency heating intended to initiate collagen reorganization and progressive dermal remodeling.
2. Dynamic vector modulation: Selective reduction of muscular contraction patterns that influence repetitive skin folding, expression lines and facial contour.

The clinical hypothesis is that addressing both components within a coordinated treatment plan may provide a more comprehensive approach to facial rejuvenation than treating either concern in isolation.

While the underlying mechanisms are supported by published research, the specific Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ protocol remains a clinician-developed approach whose comparative effectiveness has not yet been established in controlled clinical trials.

The Origin of Dynamic Vector Remodeling™: An Original Concept

Within The Mirelle Method™

The development of Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ began with a fundamental observation in clinical aesthetics: facial aging is not exclusively a problem of declining collagen.

Skin quality, muscular activity, structural support and facial biomechanics all influence how the face ages.

Traditional aesthetic treatments frequently address these factors independently. Energy-based devices target the skin and underlying connective tissues, while neuromodulators target selected facial muscles.

Dr. Ianculovici developed Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ to integrate these treatment objectives into a single, anatomy-informed protocol.

Rather than relying solely on radiofrequency-induced skin tightening, the method incorporates targeted neuromodulation immediately after Density® treatment, with the aim of altering selected contraction patterns during the subsequent remodeling period.

This clinical sequence is central to the concept.

The treatment is not simply a cosmetic combination of two procedures. It is a proposed strategy informed by three areas of established biomedical science:

• Radiofrequency-induced collagen remodeling and extracellular matrix responses.
• Facial biomechanics and cellular mechanotransduction.
• Botulinum toxin-mediated modification of neuromuscular activity.

Understanding these mechanisms helps explain the scientific rationale behind The Mirelle Method™.

Facial Aging Is a Multilayered Biological Process

The aging face is an interconnected anatomical system composed of skin, collagen, elastin, superficial and deep fat compartments, retaining ligaments, facial muscles and bone. Each of these structures changes over time.

A comprehensive anatomical review by Cotofana and colleagues, published in Facial Plastic Surgery, describes how age-associated changes in bone, ligaments, muscles, fat and skin contribute to alterations in facial appearance.

The authors emphasize that facial aging occurs across multiple tissue layers and varies considerably among individuals. [1]

At the skin level, changes include declining collagen organization, fragmentation of extracellular matrix fibers, reduced elasticity and altered fibroblast function.

At the muscular level, repeated facial expressions continually produce mechanical forces across the overlying skin.

The frontalis elevates the eyebrows. The corrugator supercilii and procerus contribute to frowning. The orbicularis oculi influences movement around the eyes. Other facial muscles participate in smiling, speaking and lower-face movement.

These muscular actions are essential to normal facial expression.

However, repeated contraction contributes to dynamic wrinkles, especially when aging skin becomes less resilient.

A treatment strategy focused exclusively on dermal tightening may therefore leave an important contributor to expression-related wrinkles untreated.

Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ was developed to consider both the structural condition of the skin and the muscular activity influencing its appearance.

The Science of Mechanotransduction: Why Mechanical Forces Matter

One of the most scientifically important concepts underlying Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ is mechanotransduction.

Mechanotransduction is the biological process by which cells detect mechanical forces and translate them into biochemical signals.

In human skin, dermal fibroblasts interact with surrounding collagen fibers through specialized cellular attachment mechanisms, including integrins.

These interactions help cells sense their extracellular environment and regulate tissue maintenance.

Collagen Fragmentation and Fibroblast Function

Research from the University of Michigan has demonstrated important relationships between aging, collagen fragmentation and fibroblast activity.

In a landmark review published in Archives of Dermatology, Fisher and colleagues explained that collagen fragmentation can impair the mechanical support required for normal fibroblast function.

When fibroblasts lose adequate attachment to an intact collagen matrix, their shape and mechanical signaling change.

These changes can contribute to decreased collagen production and increased expression of collagen-degrading enzymes. [2]

Subsequent research identified relationships among collagen fragmentation, oxidative stress and matrix metalloproteinase-1, an enzyme involved in collagen degradation. [3]

These findings demonstrate that the extracellular matrix is not simply passive structural support.

It actively influences the behavior of the cells responsible for maintaining the skin.

The Relationship Between Mechanical Tension and Collagen Remodeling

Aging-related changes in fibroblast mechanical forces can alter collagen synthesis and degradation.

Research published in Aging Cell demonstrated that reduced fibroblast spreading and mechanical force can increase expression of matrix metalloproteinase-1 through cellular signaling pathways involving c-Jun/AP-1. [4]

This is an important distinction.

Mechanical tension is not inherently harmful. Normal mechanical interactions between fibroblasts and their surrounding matrix are essential to tissue homeostasis.

Excessive, repetitive or abnormal loading can contribute to certain unwanted tissue changes, but simply reducing mechanical tension does not necessarily stimulate collagen production.

For Dynamic Vector Remodeling™, the mechanotransduction literature supports the importance of studying the skin's mechanical environment. It does not establish that neuromodulator-induced muscle relaxation directly improves radiofrequency-induced collagen synthesis.

That relationship remains a clinical hypothesis requiring investigation.

Density® Dual-Mode Radiofrequency: The Structural Remodeling Component

Density® is a noninvasive radiofrequency technology developed by Jeisys Medical.

The platform combines monopolar and bipolar radiofrequency delivery within a sequential treatment system.

Unlike technologies that rely on a single RF delivery configuration, Density® is designed to produce different patterns of tissue heating through its dual-mode approach.

According to the manufacturer, Density® incorporates impedance feedback, sequential RF delivery and multilevel epidermal cooling intended to support controlled energy delivery. [5]

Monopolar Radiofrequency

Monopolar radiofrequency delivers electrical energy through tissue, generating heat as current encounters tissue resistance.

Depending on the device configuration and treatment parameters, this technology can produce relatively broad heating within the dermis and supporting connective tissue.

Controlled thermal exposure can alter collagen structure and stimulate biological responses associated with tissue remodeling.

Bipolar Radiofrequency

Bipolar radiofrequency passes electrical current between electrodes.

Its heating pattern is generally more localized, depending on electrode geometry, power and tissue characteristics.

Combining monopolar and bipolar RF provides a rationale for influencing tissue at different depths during a coordinated treatment session.

However, the exact depth and degree of heating depend on the device, treatment tip, energy settings and individual tissue properties.

What Happens to Collagen After Radiofrequency Treatment?

Collagen is a structural protein that helps provide skin strength and support.

Appropriate thermal exposure may produce conformational changes in existing collagen while initiating signaling pathways involved in tissue repair and extracellular matrix remodeling.

Subsequent biological responses may include fibroblast activity, changes in collagen organization and production of new collagen.

These changes develop over time rather than occurring entirely during the treatment session.

This process is commonly described as neocollagenesis and collagen remodeling.

Histological Evidence of Radiofrequency-Induced Remodeling

In a 2020 study published in Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, Suh and colleagues evaluated facial skin biopsies from 11 individuals following monopolar radiofrequency treatment.

Biopsies were assessed before treatment and at two and six months afterward.

The investigators identified significant improvements in selected measurements of collagen fiber density and organization.

These findings provided direct human histological evidence that monopolar RF treatment can alter dermal collagen architecture. [6]

The study supports the biological foundation of radiofrequency-based skin remodeling, although it did not investigate the Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ protocol.

Clinical Evidence for Sequential Monopolar-Bipolar Radiofrequency

The scientific evidence becomes particularly relevant when examining studies involving Density-family systems.

A prospective clinical study published in May 2026 in Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology evaluated Density Noir for lower facial laxity.

The study enrolled 26 adults between 30 and 60 years old with mild-to-moderate lower facial laxity.

Participants underwent a single treatment using a sequential monopolar-bipolar radiofrequency system.

Of the 26 enrolled individuals, 23 completed follow-up.

At six months:

• Facial laxity ratings had improved significantly compared with baseline.
• Approximately 48% of participants who completed follow-up were rated as having marked improvement on the study's global improvement scale.
• Approximately 78% reported high satisfaction.
• Imaging-based measurements demonstrated improvements in selected nasolabial fold parameters.

Reported adverse effects included temporary redness, swelling and procedural discomfort.

The investigators concluded that the device was associated with improvements in lower facial laxity, while emphasizing the need for additional controlled research. [7]

This represents emerging device-specific evidence supporting the structural component of Dynamic Vector Remodeling™.

However, because the study was open-label, relatively small and lacked a randomized control group, its results should not be interpreted as proving superiority over other RF devices or establishing the effectiveness of any combined neuromodulation protocol.

Precision Neuromodulation: The Dynamic Vector Component

The second component of Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ involves targeted botulinum toxin type A treatment.

Botulinum toxin type A works by inhibiting the release of acetylcholine at selected neuromuscular junctions.

At a molecular level, the toxin interferes with proteins involved in neurotransmitter vesicle fusion, including SNAP-25.

This temporarily reduces muscular contraction in the treated region.

The mechanism has been extensively characterized in biomedical research and clinical practice. [8]

Why Facial Muscle Balance Matters

Facial muscles function through coordinated patterns of contraction. For example, some muscles contribute to eyebrow elevation, while others exert opposing downward forces. Selective neuromodulation can change the balance between these actions. The objective is not necessarily to eliminate muscular movement.

Instead, carefully selected treatment may reduce unwanted contraction patterns while preserving natural facial expression.

This distinction is especially important in the forehead, periorbital region and lower face, where changes in muscle activity can affect both aesthetics and function.

What Is Vector Modulation?

Within Dynamic Vector Remodeling™, the term vector refers to the direction and relative influence of muscular forces acting on facial structures.

Targeted neuromodulation can modify the contribution of selected muscles to those forces.

For example, selectively reducing activity in a brow-depressing muscle may alter its functional balance with the brow-elevating musculature.

However, botulinum toxin does not physically reposition facial tissues in the same manner as surgical lifting.

The degree and direction of any visible change depend on the patient's anatomy, injection placement, dose and the activity of adjacent muscles.

The Mirelle Method™ therefore emphasizes anatomical assessment and individualized treatment rather than standardized neuromodulator patterns.

Can Neuromodulation Influence Skin Quality Beyond Wrinkle Reduction?

An important scientific question is whether botulinum toxin may influence dermal properties beyond temporarily reducing facial contraction.

Humphrey and colleagues explored this question in a review published in Dermatologic Surgery.

The authors evaluated evidence concerning cumulative changes in wrinkle appearance, skin quality, collagen structure and potential effects on fibroblast activity following repeated botulinum toxin treatments. [9]

Their review discussed clinical observations suggesting that repeated neuromodulation may be associated with improvements in certain skin-quality characteristics.

Potential mechanisms include indirect effects arising from reduced repetitive skin folding and possible changes in fibroblast activity.

However, the available evidence does not establish that botulinum toxin consistently stimulates collagen production in living human skin.

Nor does it demonstrate that injection immediately after RF produces more collagen than RF treatment alone.

These distinctions are important when interpreting the scientific rationale for Dynamic Vector Remodeling™.

The established role of neuromodulation is to modify selected muscular activity.

Potential secondary effects on skin remodeling remain an area of scientific interest.

The Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ Protocol: Why Treatment Sequence Matters

At Mirelle Institute, Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ follows a coordinated clinical sequence developed by Dr. Ianculovici.

Phase One: Anatomical and Functional Assessment

The process begins with an evaluation of the patient's facial anatomy, skin laxity, tissue quality, expression patterns and muscular balance.

Particular attention is given to the relationship between dynamic wrinkles, resting wrinkles and areas of structural laxity.

The objective is to identify which concerns are best addressed through radiofrequency treatment and which may benefit from targeted neuromodulation.

Phase Two: Structural RF Treatment With Density®

Density® sequential monopolar-bipolar radiofrequency is administered according to the selected treatment region and appropriate device parameters.

The goal is to deliver controlled energy that initiates the biological processes associated with collagen remodeling and improved tissue firmness.

Phase Three: Immediate Post-RF Precision Neuromodulation

Following completion of the radiofrequency treatment, selected neuromodulator injections are administered when clinically appropriate.

The treatment pattern is individualized according to muscular anatomy and the desired aesthetic outcome.

This immediate post-RF sequence is a defining component of Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ under The Mirelle Method™.

The rationale is to initiate the structural RF treatment first, then begin neuromuscular modulation during the period in which longer-term dermal remodeling is expected to develop. Importantly, neuromodulator-induced muscular relaxation does not begin instantaneously.

Clinical effects generally become evident over the following several days, with a fuller response commonly developing within approximately one to two weeks.

Consequently, muscular modulation and RF-induced remodeling may overlap over the subsequent weeks and months.

This temporal overlap is central to the proposed Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ concept.

It should not, however, be interpreted as evidence that the muscular changes automatically amplify collagen production.

Phase Four: Progressive Structural and Dynamic Assessment

Follow-up evaluation may document changes in expression-related wrinkles, tissue firmness, facial contour, symmetry and patient satisfaction.

Neuromodulator effects commonly persist for several months, whereas RF-associated dermal remodeling may evolve over a longer period.

The duration and magnitude of improvement vary among patients.

There is currently insufficient direct evidence to establish that the combined protocol extends the duration of either treatment.

Is There Scientific Evidence Supporting Same-Day Radiofrequency and Neuromodulation?

Yes. Published literature provides precedent for combining certain energy-based treatments and botulinum toxin during the same visit.

In 2015, Cuerda-Galindo and colleagues published a review examining same-day combinations of radiofrequency, laser, intense pulsed light, fillers and botulinum toxin.

The review identified 15 studies, including eight investigating combinations of physical treatment modalities with botulinum toxin.

The authors reported clinical improvement without an apparent increase in adverse effects or loss of injectable effectiveness within the studies reviewed. [10]

These findings support the feasibility of selected same-day combination treatments.

However, the review did not evaluate the exact Density® plus immediate post-RF neuromodulation sequence used in Dynamic Vector Remodeling™.

What Do Expert Consensus Recommendations Say?

A 2016 expert consensus publication in Dermatologic Surgery addressed the sequencing of multiple facial aesthetic interventions.

The authors recommended individualized assessment and discussed the sequencing of botulinum toxin, fillers and microfocused ultrasound.

For same-day treatments, the consensus recommended performing microfocused ultrasound before injectable agents. [11]

Although microfocused ultrasound and radiofrequency are different technologies, this provides relevant procedural precedent for completing certain energy-based treatments before injections.

The exact safety and efficacy of same-session Density® treatment followed by neuromodulation still depend on the applicable device instructions, injection techniques, tissue response and individual patient factors.

The Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ Hypothesis: Structural Remodeling Meets Dynamic Balance

The central hypothesis behind Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ is that facial rejuvenation may benefit from considering the skin's structural remodeling response together with the muscular forces influencing its appearance.

The two treatment components operate through distinct mechanisms.

Density® radiofrequency provides a controlled thermal stimulus associated with collagen remodeling.

Precision neuromodulation temporarily modifies selected facial muscular contraction patterns.

The proposed advantage of integrating them is the ability to address both tissue quality and expression-related mechanical activity within a coordinated treatment plan.

From a biological perspective, the mechanisms are complementary. From a clinical research perspective, several questions remain unanswered:

• Does combining neuromodulation with Density® produce greater improvement in wrinkle severity or overall facial appearance than either treatment alone?
• Does the timing of neuromodulator administration influence patient-reported outcomes?
• Does the combined approach provide measurable improvements in facial contour or symmetry?
• Does neuromodulation influence any aspect of RF-associated dermal remodeling?
• Are results maintained longer with combined treatment?
• Which anatomical regions and patient populations are most likely to benefit?

These questions provide a foundation for future clinical investigation of The Mirelle Method™.

Who May Be a Candidate for Dynamic Vector Remodeling™?

Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ may be considered for appropriately selected adults who present with a combination of mild-to-moderate skin laxity and facial expression-related concerns.

Potential treatment objectives may include:

1. Periorbital rejuvenation: Addressing selected fine lines and skin-quality concerns around the eyes while evaluating the contribution of orbicularis oculi activity.
2. Forehead and brow rejuvenation: Combining structural skin-quality treatment with individualized modulation of forehead and brow-related muscular activity.
3. Midface rejuvenation: Addressing selected changes in skin firmness while evaluating the role of muscular dynamics in overall facial appearance.
4. Lower-face refinement: Considering structural laxity and selected muscular contributions to facial contour, while carefully preserving essential facial movement.

Not every patient requires both treatments.

Some individuals may benefit from Density® alone, while others may be better candidates for neuromodulation as an independent procedure.

Significant tissue descent, substantial volume loss or advanced structural aging may require alternative or additional interventions.

The Mirelle Method™ prioritizes selecting treatments according to anatomy, clinical indications and patient goals.

What Results Can Patients Expect?

The two components of Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ have different biological timelines.

Neuromodulator effects typically begin developing within days and commonly persist for approximately three to four months, depending on the product and individual response.

Radiofrequency-related changes may develop progressively over subsequent weeks and months as dermal remodeling occurs.

Patients may experience improvements in the concerns addressed by each modality, but the extent of improvement cannot be predicted precisely.

The combined protocol has not yet been demonstrated to produce superior collagen synthesis, lifting or treatment longevity compared with individual modalities.

Temporary redness, swelling, tenderness or discomfort can occur following RF treatment.

Neuromodulator injections can produce bruising, asymmetry, unwanted muscular weakness or eyelid and brow position changes. Rare but serious botulinum toxin adverse effects are described in product prescribing information.

An individualized medical assessment is necessary to review contraindications, neuromuscular conditions, relevant medications, prior procedures, implanted devices and treatment suitability.

The Mirelle Method™: A More Comprehensive Philosophy of Facial Rejuvenation

Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ reflects a broader clinical philosophy developed by Dr. Ianculovici: facial rejuvenation should be based on the interaction of biological structures rather than the isolated treatment of visible imperfections.

Under The Mirelle Method™, treatment planning integrates anatomical evaluation, skin biology, functional muscular assessment and appropriate technology.

The objective is not maximal muscle relaxation or aggressive energy delivery.

It is the deliberate selection and integration of treatments that address identifiable contributors to facial aging.

For Dynamic Vector Remodeling™, this means recognizing two distinct treatment targets:

1. The structural component: Skin firmness, collagen organization and dermal remodeling.
2. The dynamic component: Muscular activity, expression-related folding and the balance of forces influencing facial appearance.

These mechanisms can be treated separately. The Mirelle Method™ proposes that addressing them together, when appropriate, may offer a more comprehensive nonsurgical rejuvenation strategy.

The Future of Dynamic Vector Remodeling™: From Clinical Concept to Measurable Outcomes

Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ represents a clinician-developed protocol informed by existing biomedical research.

Its defining contribution is the integration of Density® sequential dual-mode RF and immediate post-treatment precision neuromodulation into a structured, anatomy-informed approach.

The next step in evaluating this concept scientifically is systematic clinical documentation. Prospective assessments could include standardized photography, validated wrinkle and facial laxity scales, three-dimensional imaging, objective skin elasticity measurements and patient-reported outcomes.

Comparative studies could then investigate whether the coordinated protocol provides measurable benefits beyond its individual treatment components.

Such investigation would help distinguish the established biological effects of each intervention from any additional benefits attributable to the specific treatment sequence.

Conclusion: The Future of Facial Rejuvenation Is More Intelligent Treatment

Facial aging is more complex than collagen loss alone.

The visible effects of aging reflect changes in skin structure, extracellular matrix biology, facial anatomy and the muscular forces that shape expression.

Dynamic Vector Remodeling™, conceived and developed by Dr. Corina M. Ianculovici under The Mirelle Method™, brings these concepts together through a coordinated clinical approach.

By integrating Density® dual-mode radiofrequency with precision neuromodulation, the protocol seeks to address both structural and dynamic contributors to facial appearance.

Its scientific foundation draws from established research in collagen remodeling, mechanotransduction, facial biomechanics and neuromuscular pharmacology.

Its specific combined effectiveness remains an important question for future clinical study.

The future of facial rejuvenation is not more aggressive treatment. It is more intelligent treatment, guided by anatomy, biology and the relationship between structure and movement.

Scientific References

The following peer-reviewed publications and technical sources support the biological mechanisms and clinical concepts discussed in this article.

1. Facial Aging and Multilayered Anatomy

Cotofana S, Fratila AAM, Schenck TL, et al. (2016). The Anatomy of the Aging Face: A Review. Facial Plastic Surgery, 32(3), 253–260.

Read the study on PubMed

DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1582234

2. Fibroblast Mechanical Tension and Skin Aging

Fisher GJ, Varani J, Voorhees JJ. (2008). Looking Older: Fibroblast Collapse and Therapeutic Implications. Archives of Dermatology, 144(5), 666–672.

Read the full study

DOI: 10.1001/archderm.144.5.666

3. Collagen Fragmentation and Oxidative Stress

Fisher GJ, Quan T, Purohit T, et al. (2009). Collagen Fragmentation Promotes Oxidative Stress and Elevates Matrix Metalloproteinase-1 in Fibroblasts in Aged Human Skin. American Journal of Pathology, 174(1), 101–114.

Read the full study

DOI: 10.2353/ajpath.2009.080599

4. Mechanotransduction and Collagen Degradation

Age-Associated Reduction of Cellular Spreading/Mechanical Force Up-Regulates Matrix Metalloproteinase-1 Expression and Collagen Fibril Fragmentation via c-Jun/AP-1 in Human Dermal Fibroblasts. Aging Cell.

Read the full study

5. Density® Radiofrequency Technology

Jeisys Medical. Density® Technology, Sequential Monopolar-Bipolar RF, Cooling and Impedance Feedback.

Official manufacturer technical information

Manufacturer documentation, not an independent clinical investigation.

6. Human Histological Evidence of RF Remodeling

Suh DH, Ahn HJ, Seo JK, et al. (2020). Monopolar Radiofrequency Treatment for Facial Laxity: Histometric Analysis. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 19(9), 2317–2324.

Read the study on PubMed

DOI: 10.1111/jocd.13449

7. Density® Dual-Mode RF Clinical Research

Chottawornsak N, Punthitra V, Kusonjai D, et al. (2026). Evaluation of a Novel Bimodal-Approach Radiofrequency Device for Lower Facial Tightening in Southeast Asian Patients: An Open-Label Prospective Study. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 25(6), e70932.

Read the full study

DOI: 10.1111/jocd.70932

8. Botulinum Toxin Mechanism of Action

Botox (OnabotulinumtoxinA) Mechanism of Action. (2023).

Read the full scientific review

9. Potential Cumulative Effects of Neuromodulation

Humphrey S, Jacky B, Gallagher CJ. (2017). Preventive, Cumulative Effects of Botulinum Toxin Type A in Facial Aesthetics. Dermatologic Surgery, 43(Suppl 3), S244–S251.

Read the study on PubMed

DOI: 10.1097/DSS.0000000000001404

10. Evidence for Same-Day Combined Aesthetic Treatments

Cuerda-Galindo E, Palomar-Gallego MA, Linares-Garcíavaldecasas R. (2015). Are Combined Same-Day Treatments the Future for Photorejuvenation? Review of the Literature on Combined Treatments With Lasers, Intense Pulsed Light, Radiofrequency, Botulinum Toxin, and Fillers for Rejuvenation. Journal of Cosmetic and Laser Therapy, 17(1), 49–54.

Read the study on PubMed

DOI: 10.3109/14764172.2014.968578

11. Expert Consensus on Combined Treatment Sequencing

Carruthers J, et al. (2016). Consensus Recommendations for Combined Aesthetic Interventions in the Face Using Botulinum Toxin, Fillers, and Energy-Based Devices. Dermatologic Surgery, 42(5), 586–597.

Read the study on PubMed

DOI: 10.1097/DSS.0000000000000754

Clinical Concept and Intellectual Property Attribution

Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ | The Mirelle Method™

Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ is an original clinical treatment concept conceived and developed by Corina M. Ianculovici, DNP, FAAMFM, ABAAM-HP, AGNP, founder of Mirelle Institute for Longevity & Regenerative Medicine.

The concept combines Density® sequential monopolar-bipolar radiofrequency with anatomically targeted neuromodulation administered immediately following the RF treatment, when clinically appropriate.

The Mirelle Method™ and Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ are proprietary clinical-method designations claimed by Mirelle Institute.

Authorship and attribution refer to Dr. Ianculovici's development of this specific treatment concept and protocol. They do not imply invention or exclusive ownership of the underlying medical technologies, pharmacological mechanisms or established procedures.

© 2026 Mirelle Institute for Longevity & Regenerative Medicine. All rights reserved.

Density® is a trademark of its respective owner.

Medical and Scientific Disclosure: Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ is a clinician-developed combination protocol. The individual treatment modalities have supporting clinical literature, but the specific combined protocol has not been established as superior through controlled comparative studies. The U.S. FDA clearance for Density® concerns electrocoagulation and hemostasis, and should not be represented as FDA clearance of Dynamic Vector Remodeling™ or of a specific cosmetic lifting claim. Treatment decisions must follow applicable device labeling, medication prescribing information and individualized clinical evaluation.