A Randomized Pilot Study Comparing the Action Halos of Two Commercial Preparations of Botulinum Toxin Type A

Field effect of two commercial preparations of botulinum toxin type A: A prospective, double-blind, randomized clinical trial

“…7,28-30 In a previous pilot study, the current authors found similar results for ABO and ONA in muscles and sweat glands in a small sample of 18 patients using the dose equivalence of 2.5:1.0 U. 31 In that study, only the differences in diameters of FME and FAE over 3 mm were considered clinically relevant. 31 Recently, Karsai and Raulin 32 have carried out a systematic review in the literature and found that dose equivalences less than 3:1 (2.5:1.0 U or even 2.0:1.0 U) for ABO and ONA should be used.…”

“…31 In that study, only the differences in diameters of FME and FAE over 3 mm were considered clinically relevant. 31 Recently, Karsai and Raulin 32 have carried out a systematic review in the literature and found that dose equivalences less than 3:1 (2.5:1.0 U or even 2.0:1.0 U) for ABO and ONA should be used.…”

An Overview of Botulinum Toxins: Past, Present, and Future

“…They found significantly increased anhidrotic haloes with all dose ratios (the mean absolute increase in area of the anhidrotic halo was 1.2 cm 2 with the lowest Dysport dose). These results were challenged by a similarly designed comparative trial conducted by Hexsel and colleagues, 26 which found no significant difference in the field of anhidrosis using only the more widely accepted equipotent dose ratio of 1:2.5. Hexsel and colleagues 26 reported taking great care to standardize injection technique, which would certainly influence results.…”

“…These results were challenged by a similarly designed comparative trial conducted by Hexsel and colleagues, 26 which found no significant difference in the field of anhidrosis using only the more widely accepted equipotent dose ratio of 1:2.5. Hexsel and colleagues 26 reported taking great care to standardize injection technique, which would certainly influence results. Of note, the first two studies described were sponsored by Allergan and the third by Ipsen.…”

Botulinum toxin in aesthetic applications: ‘How often misused words generate misleading thoughts’

“…In such studies, the higher diffusion with associated adverse events for one product is due to an inappropriate so-called dose conversion factor, often coupled with an inadequate, non-standardized injection technique (13). When a suitable dose conversion factor is employed with a highly standardized injection technique, the results for both products are equal at equal doses (14,15).…”