BACKGROUND Hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers have been studied extensively on the face; however, their safety and efficacy on the neck has not yet been evaluated in a prospective trial in the United States. OBJECTIVE Analyze the efficacy and safety of a HA filler for static horizontal neck rhytides using either a cannula or needle. MATERIALS AND METHODS Twenty-six subjects were randomized to receive up to 1 mL of the HA filler Restylane Refyne (HARR, n = 20) or saline (n = 6) using a cannula on one side and a needle on the other with optional repeat treatment. Subjects were graded using the Transverse Neck Line Scale, Canfield photography, and the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale. RESULTS A significant improvement 30 days after the last treatment was achieved on the Transverse Neck Line Scale when comparing HARR with saline according to the blind evaluator, subjects, and investigator without any significant side effects. In addition, the blind evaluator, subjects, and investigator rated the side of the neck injected with a needle as having significantly greater improvement than the cannula. CONCLUSION The hyaluronic acid filler, Restylane Refyne, achieved significant improvement in static horizontal neck rhytides using either a cannula or needle without any serious side effects, although the needle was more effective.
Background: Hyaluronic acid fillers have been studied extensively for facial wrinkles; however, their efficacy for atrophic facial scars has yet to be analyzed in a prospective placebo-controlled study. Objective:To analyze the efficacy and safety of a hyaluronic acid filler for atrophic facial scars.Methods & Materials: Fifteen subjects were randomized to receive up to 1 ml of VYC-17.5 L on one cheek and up to 1 ml of saline on the other side, with an optional touch-up treatment. Subjects were graded by a live blind evaluator using the Quantitative Global Scarring Grading System (QGSGS) (J Cosmet Dermatol. 2006;5:48), the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS), and Canfield photo-analysis.Results: According to the blind evaluator, there was a significant reduction 90 days after the last treatment on the QGSGS for VYC-17.5L compared with saline (−6.6 VYC-17.5L vs −1.7 saline [t(28) = −4.3196, p = 0.008]). There was a smaller, but still significant reduction on the QGSGS for saline alone (10.4 to 8.6 [t(14) = −3.453, p = 0.004]). In addition, 93% (13/14) of subjects chose VYC-17.5L over saline treatment and reported an improvement on the GAIS. There were no serious side effects and all minor side effects resolved by Day 30. Conclusion:VYC-17.5L achieved significant improvements in rolling atrophic scars as compared to saline, though saline also had modest improvements.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.