The rapid expansion of aesthetic cosmetology has created a dense and sometimes inconsistent vocabulary for describing skin treatments. Terms such as skin rejuvenation, resurfacing, chemical peeling, microneedling, fractional laser, non-ablative therapy, intense pulsed light, and photobiomodulation are widely used in clinical practice, scientific publications, and commercial communication, yet they are not always employed with equal precision. This article examines the terminology of skin treatments in aesthetic cosmetology with the aim of clarifying how key procedural terms are defined, grouped, and differentiated in dermatologic and cosmetic literature. The study is based on an analytical review of clinical reviews, systematic reviews, and professional sources addressing skin resurfacing, energy-based devices, minimally invasive procedures, and photoaging management. The findings show that the terminology of aesthetic skin treatments is structured around several central oppositions: invasive versus non-invasive, ablative versus non-ablative, full-field versus fractional, mechanical versus chemical versus energy-based action, and corrective versus rejuvenative indications. The review also demonstrates that terminological precision is not merely linguistic; it has direct implications for patient selection, expectations, safety communication, and scientific comparability. The article argues that a standardized terminological approach should distinguish between mechanism of action, tissue depth, treatment objective, and recovery profile. Such an approach helps separate medical terminology from marketing language and supports more accurate interdisciplinary communication in aesthetic cosmetology.

Aesthetic cosmetology, skin treatments, terminology, skin rejuvenation

Wiest L., Kerscher M. Chemical peels in aesthetic dermatology // Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft. 2004. Vol. 2. No. 5. P. 368–378. PMID: 15179505.

Fischer T. C., Perosino E., Poli F., Viera M. S., Dreno B. Chemical peels in aesthetic dermatology: an update 2009 // Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology. 2010. Vol. 24. No. 3. P. 281–292. doi:10.1111/j.1468-3083.2009.03405.x.

O’Connor A. A., Lowe P. M., Shumack S., Lim A. C. Chemical peels: a review of current practice // Australasian Journal of Dermatology. 2018. Vol. 59. No. 3. P. 171–181. doi:10.1111/ajd.12715.

Costa I. M. C., Campos Do Vale A., Sousa Bezerra de Araujo Pereira C., et al. Review in peeling complications // Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology. 2017. Vol. 16. No. 3. P. 319–326. doi:10.1111/jocd.12340.

Alster T. S., Graham P. M. Microneedling: a review and practical guide // Dermatologic Surgery. 2018. Vol. 44. No. 3. P. 397–404. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000001248.

Hou A., Cohen B., Haimovic A., Elbuluk N. Microneedling: a comprehensive review // Dermatologic Surgery. 2017. Vol. 43. No. 3. P. 321–339. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000001002.

Bonati L. M., Epstein H., Strugar T. L. Microneedling in all skin types: a review // Journal of Drugs in Dermatology. 2017. Vol. 16. No. 4. P. 308–313. PMID: 28403263.

Tan M. G., Alster T. S. Radiofrequency microneedling: a comprehensive and critical review // Dermatologic Surgery. 2021. Vol. 47. No. 6. P. 755–761. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000002988.

Chandra S., Kwatra S. G., Jacob C. I. Physics of fractional microneedle radiofrequency: a review // Lasers in Surgery and Medicine. 2024. Vol. 56. No. 10. P. 1229–1238. doi:10.1002/lsm.23772.

Pozner J. N., Goldberg D. J. Laser resurfacing: full field and fractional // Clinics in Plastic Surgery. 2016. Vol. 43. No. 3. P. 515–525. doi:10.1016/j.cps.2016.03.001.

Aslam A., Alster T. S. Evolution of laser skin resurfacing: from scanning to fractional technology // Dermatologic Surgery. 2014. Vol. 40. No. 11. P. 1163–1172. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000000168.

Haykal D., Jeong D., Saad A., et al. Advancements in laser technologies for skin rejuvenation // Lasers in Medical Science. 2024. Vol. 39. Art. 165. doi:10.1007/s10103-024-04181-9.

Ross E. V., McKinlay J. R., Anderson R. R. Laser versus intense pulsed light: competing technologies in dermatology // Lasers in Surgery and Medicine. 2006. Vol. 38. No. 4. P. 261–272. doi:10.1002/lsm.20277.

Karrer S., Kohl E., Feise K., Hiepe-Wegener D., Lischner S., Philipp-Dormston W. Photodynamic therapy for skin rejuvenation: review and summary of the literature—results of a consensus conference of an expert group for aesthetic photodynamic therapy // Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft. 2013. Vol. 11. No. 2. P. 137–148. doi:10.1111/ddg.12010.

Avci P., Gupta A., Sadasivam M., et al. Low-level laser (light) therapy (LLLT) in skin: stimulating, healing, restoring // Seminars in Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery. 2013. Vol. 32. No. 1. P. 41–52. doi:10.12788/j.sder.0001.

Mineroff J., Jagdeo J. Photobiomodulation CME part II: clinical applications in dermatology // Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2024. Vol. 90. No. 5. P. 833–848. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2023.11.052.

Gupta V., Sharma V. K. Skin typing: Fitzpatrick grading and others // Clinics in Dermatology. 2019. Vol. 37. No. 5. P. 430–436. doi:10.1016/j.clindermatol.2019.07.010.

Lim S. S., Oon H. H. Optimisation of skin phototype classification // Clinical and Experimental Dermatology. 2023. Vol. 48. No. 11. P. 1351–1358. doi:10.1093/ced/llad146.

Chan I. L., Cohen S., da Cunha M. G., Maluf L. C. Characteristics and management of Asian skin // International Journal of Dermatology. 2019. Vol. 58. No. 2. P. 131–143. doi:10.1111/ijd.14117.

Gowda A., Heal C., Ozolins M., et al. A systematic review examining the potential adverse effects of microneedling // Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic Dermatology. 2021. Vol. 14. No. 1. P. 45–54. PMID: 33584968.