BACKGROUND Calcium hydroxylapatite (CaHA) is approved to correct moderate-to-severe wrinkles and folds and soft-tissue volume loss in the face and hands. More recently, subdermal injection using diluted CaHA has been used to improve skin laxity. OBJECTIVE To review evidence for the safe and effective use of diluted CaHA in the face and body and provide best practice recommendations. METHODS A global panel of expert aesthetic physicians convened to develop consensus-based guidelines for treating laxity and superficial wrinkles using diluted (ratio of 1:1) and hyperdiluted (≥1:2) CaHA. RESULTS Diluted and hyperdiluted CaHA stimulates targeted neocollagenesis in the injection area to improve laxity and skin quality in the mid- and lower face, neck, décolletage, upper arms, abdomen, upper legs, and buttocks. Treatment can be used as an adjunct to volume augmentation or combined with additional modalities for optimal results. Adverse events are related to the injection and include bruising, swelling, mild pain, and induration. In thinner and darker skin, too-superficial injections of less diluted CaHA can lead to more adverse events. CONCLUSION This report provides preliminary guidelines for the novel off-label use of CaHA for biostimulation in the face and body. Further trials will provide additional clarity regarding treatment paradigms for optimal outcomes.

Background and Objectives: There is a wide diversity of opinions regarding the management of delayed inflammatory reactions (DIRs) secondary to hyaluronic acid (HA)-based fillers. The plethora of approaches has led the authors to conduct a review regarding management and treatment of DIRs as well as establish therapeutic guidelines for this purpose. Materials and Methods: A review of the literature was performed through databases such as PubMed using keywords including HA-fillers and complications, delayed HA filler sequelae and therapy, soft tissue and dermal filler reactions and management. Additionally, a survey comprised of questions regarding the management and treatment of DIRs was sent to 18 physicians highly experienced with soft-tissue filler injections in 10 countries. Their answers and recommendations were analyzed and debated amongst these panelists. Results: Sixteen panelists favored antibiotic therapy as first-line treatment for DIRs, specifically dual antibiotic therapy consisting of a fluoroquinolone along with a tetracycline or macrolide for a period of 3-6 weeks. The majority refrained from the use of intralesional (IL) or systemic steroids except in the case of disfiguring or recalcitrant reactions. IL hyaluronidase was recommended by 13 panelists; however, some preferred a watchful waiting approach for a period of 48 hours to 2 weeks prior to IL hyaluronidase, and in cases where antibiotics did not lead to improvement. Conclusion: A consensus was reached and summarized to propose a clear, easy-to-follow, stepwise algorithm for the treatment of DIRs.

Expert consensus supports a combination approach using multiple modalities in specific sequence for the safe and effective treatment of the aging face.

Background Inadvertent intra‐arterial injection of dermal fillers including calcium hydroxylapatite (CaHA) can result in serious adverse events including soft tissue necrosis, permanent scarring, visual impairment, and blindness. When intra‐arterial injection occurs, immediate action is required for optimal outcomes, but the infrequency of this event means that many physicians may never have experienced this scenario. The aim of this document is to provide evidence‐based and expert opinion recommendations for the recognition and management of vascular compromise following inadvertent injection of CaHA. Methods An international group of experts with experience in injection of CaHA and management of vascular complications was convened to develop a consensus on the optimal management of vascular compromise following intra‐arterial CaHA injection. The consensus members were asked to provide preventative advice for the avoidance of intravascular injection and to produce a treatment protocol for acute and delayed presentation. To ensure all relevant treatment options were included, the recommendations were supplemented with a PubMed search of the literature. Results For prevention of intra‐arterial CaHA injection, consensus members outlined the importance of a thorough knowledge of facial vascular anatomy and patient history, as well as highlighting potential risk zones and optimal injection techniques. Individual sections document how to recognize the symptoms of vascular occlusion leading to vision loss and tissue necrosis as well as detailed treatment protocols for the management of these events. For impending tissue necrosis, recommendations are provided for early and delayed presentations with treatment protocols for acute and follow‐up treatment. A separate section details the treatment options for open and closed wounds. Conclusions All physicians should be prepared for the eventuality of intra‐arterial injection of a dermal filler, despite its rarity. These consensus recommendations combine advice from aesthetic experts with the latest reports from the published literature to provide an up‐to‐date office‐based protocol for the prevention and treatment of complications arising from intra‐arterial CaHA injection.

Introduction Skin quality is an important component of human attractiveness. To date, there are no standardized criteria for good skin quality. To establish a consensus for good skin quality parameters and measurement and treatment options, a virtual skin quality advisory board consisting of a global panel of highly experienced aesthetic dermatologists/aesthetic physicians was convened. Methods A total of 10 dermatologists/aesthetic physicians served on the advisory board. A modified version of the Delphi method was used to arrive at consensus. Members accessed an online platform to review statements on skin quality criteria from their peers, including treatment and measurement options, and voted to indicate whether they agreed or disagreed. Statements that did not have agreement were modified and the members voted again. Consensus was defined as: strong consensus = greater than 95% agreement; consensus = 75% to 95% agreement; majority consent = 50% to 75% agreement; no consensus = less than 50% agreement. Results There was strong consensus that good skin quality is defined as healthy, youthful in appearance (appearing younger than a person’s chronological age), undamaged skin and that skin quality can be described across all ethnicities by four emergent perceptual categories (EPCs): skin tone evenness, skin surface evenness, skin firmness, and skin glow. The EPCs can be affected by multiple tissue layers (ie, skin surface quality can stem from and be impacted by deep structures or tissues). This means that topical approaches may not be sufficient. Instead, improving skin quality EPCs can require a multilayer treatment strategy. Conclusion This global advisory board established strong consensus that skin quality can be described by four EPCs, which can help clinicians determine the appropriate treatment option(s) and the tissue or skin layer(s) to address. Skin quality is important to human health and wellbeing and patients’ perception for the need for aesthetic treatment.