Durability of Three Different Types of Hyaluronic Acid Fillers in Skin: Are There Differences Among Biphasic, Monophasic Monodensified, and Monophasic Polydensified Products?

Costa, Adilson; Biccigo, Danilo Guerreiro Zeolo; Weimann, Ellem Tatiani de Souza; Mercadante, Larissa Mondadori; Oliveira, Paulo Roberto Grimaldi; Prebianchi, Stefânia Bazanelli; Abdalla, Beatrice Martinez Zugaib

doi:10.1093/asj/sjw161

Cited by 21 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…15 Although we expected C-C to have greater longevity compared with J-V, this was not verified in our clinical study with both being durable at week 48. Studies have reported similar histological durability between monophasic monodensified HA fillers and biphasic products, 11,[32][33][34][35][36] and a longer follow-up would be necessary to differentiate the longevity between C-C and J-V.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…It is highly biocompatible without tissue specificity and absorbs water extensively, thus creating volume. 10,11 Many HA fillers are commercially available, each differing in HA concentration, the degree of cross-linking, and particle size which ultimately contribute to essential gel properties such as hardness, cohesiveness, and swelling ratio. [12][13][14][15] With the availability of HA fillers providing structure and support (ie, products with high gel hardness and cohesivity), 3,6,[16][17][18][19] their applicability on the nose is clear.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A comparison of the safety, efficacy, and longevity of two different hyaluronic acid fillers in filler rhinoplasty: A multicenter study

Rho¹,

Youn

Youn³

et al. 2021

Dermatologic Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Filler rhinoplasty is a popular procedure in Asia, and it is of great importance to understand the clinical efficacy and durability of the different filler products that serve this purpose. Here, we aimed to evaluate and compare the safety, efficacy, and longevity of two different hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers in improving the nasal profile in Asians. A multicenter comparative trial was performed for 48 weeks after a single injection of a popular monophasic monodensified, and a newly developed biphasic HA filler. Assessments including patient satisfaction and three‐dimensional (3D) imaging analysis were performed before, immediately after, 2 weeks, 12 weeks, 24 weeks, and 48 weeks after filler rhinoplasty. Twenty‐eight Korean women underwent structured rhinoplasty were divided into monophasic monodensified (n = 14) and biphasic (n = 14) groups. There were significant changes in the facial profile following filler rhinoplasty throughout the study period. Overall, an increase of 1.75 mm in nose height, increase of 3.66° in the nasofrontal angle and 2.77° in the nasolabial angle, and radix elevation of 1.24 mm was noted at week 48 which was statistically different from the baseline values (P < .05). Between the different filler types, statistical difference was only noted in radix elevation (per milliliter of filler material) immediately after filler injection. No serious adverse event occurred during treatment or follow‐up. Nonsurgical rhinoplasty with the specific HA filler products led to significant changes in the facial profile which persisted for 48 weeks. Overall, the clinical efficacy and safety were comparable between the two filler types except for radix elevation which was more prominent with C‐C immediately after filler injection. J‐V was superior to C‐C in maintaining the radix elevation long term.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of the safety, efficacy, and longevity of two different hyaluronic acid fillers in filler rhinoplasty: A multicenter study

Rho¹,

Youn

Youn³

et al. 2021

Dermatologic Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Non-cross-linked HA fillers last less than 24 hours in the skin. [12][13][14] In 2019, HA fillers were considered the top-2 nonsurgical procedures performed in the USA, which represented more than 1.6 billion dollars spent on 749 409 HA-based procedures. Indeed, HA fillers had 26.4% increment when it was compared to 2015.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For these reasons, the search for less invasive procedures that require less time to restore daily activities has been progressively increasing. The durability of an HA filler can be established by the cross‐linking of this HA: Non–cross‐linked HA fillers last less than 24 hours in the skin 12‐14 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physicians' and patients' self‐perceptions of hyaluronic acid–based facial volumization: Are they compatible?

Lima

Moura

Pitoni³

et al. 2021

J of Cosmetic Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Changes in life perspectives and increased longevity have led to greater concern with the physical appearance and the effects of aging, which can be classified as intrinsic (due to genetics and age) and extrinsic (related to external factors such as pollution, ultraviolet radiation, smoke, and stress). As a result, the aging process has been increasingly studied and discussed in the scientific community to better understand the changes that have occurred and, consequently, to propose the best treatments and prevention of this condition. 1 The study of Conrado et al sought to determine the prevalence of body dysmorphic disorder in dermatological patients, comparing general and cosmetic complaints and describing clinical and demographic characteristics. A total of 150 subjects were evaluated in the cosmetic group, 150 in the general group, and 50 in the control group. The prevalence of body dysmorphic disorder was higher in the cosmetic group (14%) than in the general group (6.7%) and the control group (2%). The subjects in the cosmetic group were, in general, dissatisfied with the dermatological treatment results. 2 Cosmetic procedures seem to correlate positively with the evolution of body image dissatisfaction in the West. 3

show abstract

“…Based on the nature of formulations HA products can be broadly classified into three types: [ 21 ] Solutions of HA: utilizes the physicochemical and biological properties of HA. Conjugates of HA: improves/incorporates functional effects onto HA. Cross‐linked HA: improve the retention and dispersibility of HA. Further classified as monophasic (monodensified or polydensified) and biphasic. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crossing the hurdles of translation—a robust methodology for synthesis, characterization and GMP production of cross‐linked high molecular weight hyaluronic acid particles (cHA)

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hyaluronic acid (HA) is one of the most widely used extracellular matrix substrate in tissue engineering, drug delivery, and other clinical applications, due to its unique physiochemical properties and ubiquitous biological presence. In the past decade, there has been a surge in research paradigms involving HA products to evaluate their commercial feasibility. Numerous papers and reviews have reported procedures for chemical modifications and cross‐linking of HA, but the intricacies of their scale‐up in the production processes are often not discussed. Protected by confidentiality agreements with industry partners, information on these procedures is exclusive and not accessible within an academic setting. Establishing translatable synthetic protocols of HA would address this significant gap in the field and facilitate their use in other applications. The current method details a reproducible and robust method for producing particles that are composed of high molecular weight hyaluronic acid (cHA) and cross‐linked via a 4‐arm polyethylene glycol amine linker using 4‐(4,6‐dimethoxy‐1,3,5‐triazin‐2‐yl)‐4‐methyl‐morpholinium chloride chemistry. A critical analysis of previously reported procedures for their advantages and limitations (reaction parameters, molar equivalents, and reagents used for cross‐linking), forms the basis for this procedure and its subsequent adaptation to good manufacturing practices requirements. As a component of a Class III medical device, the reported cHA is in the form of non‐sized particles.

show abstract

Durability of Three Different Types of Hyaluronic Acid Fillers in Skin: Are There Differences Among Biphasic, Monophasic Monodensified, and Monophasic Polydensified Products?

Cited by 21 publications

References 36 publications

A comparison of the safety, efficacy, and longevity of two different hyaluronic acid fillers in filler rhinoplasty: A multicenter study

A comparison of the safety, efficacy, and longevity of two different hyaluronic acid fillers in filler rhinoplasty: A multicenter study

Physicians' and patients' self‐perceptions of hyaluronic acid–based facial volumization: Are they compatible?

Crossing the hurdles of translation—a robust methodology for synthesis, characterization and GMP production of cross‐linked high molecular weight hyaluronic acid particles (cHA)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About