A case of a delayed granulomatous reaction on the face following microneedling: A case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Microneedling is a common non-invasive procedure used for a variety of dermatologic conditions. It is associated with a low rate of adverse events which are typically temporary. Hypersensitivity reactions, including granuloma formation, are a rare adverse event, with only 10 cases previously reported. Case Summary: We report a case of a 49-year-old female who presented with asymptomatic edematous erythematous annular plaques on her left cheek following a microneedling procedure in which a Vitamin C cosmeceutical was applied to the skin beforehand. Skin biopsy confirmed non-necrotizing granulomatous dermatitis with negative tissue cultures. Systemic workup for sarcoidosis was negative. Conclusion: Delayed facial granulomatous reaction is an uncommon adverse event following microneedling. Increased risk may be related to peri-procedure use of cosmeceuticals such as Vitamin C. Given the popularity of microneedling, and that it is an unregulated procedure, it is important for dermatologists to be aware of this possible sequela in order to counsel patients appropriately and understand management options.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".