BackgroundJuvéderm Voluma XC is a volumizing hyaluronic acid filler used for correction of age-related midface volume deficit (MVD).ObjectivesThe effectiveness of Juvéderm Voluma XC was examined from the patient perspective.MethodsPatients with moderate to severe age-related MVD (N = 235) received Juvéderm Voluma XC. At quarterly follow-up visits for 2 years, patients rated treatment outcomes on the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS), overall satisfaction with facial appearance, satisfaction with midfacial regions, achievement of treatment goal, Look and Feel of the Midface (LAFM), and Self-Perception of Age (SPA). Patients recorded treatment-site responses in 30-day diaries.ResultsAt 6 months and 2 years after treatment, 92.8% and 79.0% of patients, respectively, rated their cheek volume as improved/much improved on the GAIS. Improvement in satisfaction with facial appearance was noted by 89.8% of patients at 6 months and 75.8% at 2 years. Increased satisfaction with outer and lower cheek areas and cheek-bone projection and clinically significant improvements in LAFM were noted through month 24. Treatment goals were achieved by 67.8% of patients at 6 months and 49.0% at 2 years. Patients reported looking, on average, 5 years younger at 6 months and 3 years younger at 2 years. The most common treatment site responses were tenderness, swelling, firmness, and lumps/bumps; most were mild to moderate in severity and lasted ≤2 weeks.ConclusionsJuvéderm Voluma XC for age-related MVD is effective and well-tolerated from the patient perspective, with results lasting up to 2 years.Level of Evidence4 Therapeutic

The amount and complexity of scientific and clinical evidence for aesthetic use of botulinum neurotoxin type A (BoNT-A) has expanded rapidly in recent years, especially for abobotulinumtoxinA, necessitating reassessment of current knowledge about aesthetic use of abobotulinumtoxinA and other BoNT-A preparations. A committee of 13 plastic surgeons, facial plastic surgeons, and dermatologists engaged in a live discussion of information from a systematic literature review and an Internet-based survey of their beliefs and practices. The committee achieved consensus on most issues. It was concluded that doses of different BoNT-A preparations cannot be interconverted with a fixed ratio. The size of the "field of effect" is difficult to measure, and comparisons between preparations have yielded equivocal results. Nonresponse due to neutralizing antibodies appears exceedingly rare with currently available BoNT-A preparations and of little concern clinically. BoNT-A dose, injection depth, and injection technique should be adjusted according to the anatomic area being treated and each patient's individual characteristics and goals. Aesthetic use of BoNT-A has a good safety profile. Most adverse events are minor and related to the trauma of injection, although special care is needed in certain anatomic areas. Detailed recommendations for treatment of different anatomic areas are presented. BoNT-A products are often used in conjunction with other treatment modalities (eg, fillers and resurfacing), but little agreement was reached on best practices. The findings reported in this consensus document may serve as a practical guide for aesthetic practitioners as they apply the latest knowledge about BoNT-A in providing their patients with optimal care.

No abstract

The creation of the nipple-areola complex is often the final step in the surgical treatment of breast cancer patients, and it consequently has important symbolic and aesthetic implications. Patient expectations and the need for symmetry make nipple projection a crucial aesthetic determinant of nipple reconstruction. We hypothesize that long-term nipple projection and shape can be achieved in a predictable fashion using the modified star dermal fat flap technique. Prospectively, 93 nipples were reconstructed by a single surgeon using a modified star dermal fat flap technique in 44 implant and 49 TRAM flap breast reconstructions. Flap dimensions (base diameter and flap length) were designed according to patient desire or to the base diameter and projection of the opposite breast nipple. A standardized, 3-month postoperative care regimen was observed in all patients. Nipple projection was assessed by the same observer at each follow-up examination. The average length of follow-up was 730 days (745 for TRAM reconstructions and 713 for implants). Consistently, an average of 41 percent of the intraoperative projection remained intact in both groups at final evaluation (SD 12 percent). The total flap length was strongly predictive of intraoperative and long-term projection (r = 0.64 and 0.86, p < 0.0001). Flap lengths ranged from 5.5 to 9.0 cm, and in a linear correlation, resulted in intraoperative projection of 1.0 to 2.1 cm, respectively, and long-term projection of 0.4 to 0.83 cm, respectively. Based on the linear relationship, every 1-cm increase in flap length could be expected to result in a 0.16-cm increase in projection. When controlled for flap length and intraoperative projection, there was no difference between TRAM and implant nipple reconstruction in predicting postoperative nipple projection. Intraoperative planning and execution are critical to achieve predictable nipple shape, size, and projection. The dimensions of the star dermal fat flap can be strategically modified to allow the surgeon predictable projection with a consistent 41-percent preservation of intraoperative nipple projection in both TRAM and implant patients at 2 years.