Filler Migration and Florid Granulomatous Reaction to Hyaluronic Acid Mimicking a Buccal Tumor

Kaczorowski, Maciej; Nelke, Kamil; Łuczak, Klaudiusz; Hałoń, Agnieszka

doi:10.1097/scs.0000000000005928

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Granulomas have been reported to form after possible migration from the nasolabial fold into the buccal region. 35 Inflammatory granulomas may result from biofilms or hypersensitivity to the filler.…”

Section: Infectionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nonvascular Complications of Injectable Fillers—Prevention and Management

Singh

Nooreyezdan

2020

Indian J Plast Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Injectable filler treatments have increased in popularity because of enhanced safety profile and improved physical characteristics. ISAPS (International Society of Plastic Surgery) put out global data showing 3.7 million hyaluronic acid (HA) filler procedures in 2018, making it the second most often performed procedure in the world, after botulinum toxin. And these are only ‘those’ performed by qualified plastic surgeons. There was a concomitant increase in both the nonvascular and vascular complications, which coincided with the number and type of filler procedures performed. Filler complications were reviewed from existing literature, and an attempt was made to understand etiology, elucidate clinical features, and clarify optimum treatment strategies for each. Complications can be early or delayed in presentation, early consisting of injection site complications like bruising, edema, and hypersensitivity, Tyndall effect, and intravascular injection. Delayed complications included hypersensitivity type IV, acute infections like cellulitis, abscesses, and herpes and delayed ones like granulomas, biofilms, and atypical mycobacterial infections. These were analyzed and treatment options, protocols, and consensus guidelines were suggested. A clear understanding of facial anatomy, physical characteristics of all fillers used, early recognition, and treatment options of complications will ensure optimum outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Infectionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nonvascular Complications of Injectable Fillers—Prevention and Management

Singh

Nooreyezdan

2020

Indian J Plast Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This situation may present undesired circumstances in terms of aesthetic and functional outcomes. 15–18…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This situation may present undesired circumstances in terms of aesthetic and functional outcomes. [15][16][17][18] Agarose is a material known for its different rheological properties. 19 Its hydrocolloid and nonhydrophilic nature allow for accurate injections.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hybrid Nasal Filler: Combining Agarose Gel and Hyaluronic Acid for Nonsurgical Rhinoplasty

Buhsem¹,

Kirazoglu

2022

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery - Global Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Given its structural properties, it would be a mistake to assume that a single type of filler fits perfectly to each anatomical region of the nose in nonsurgical rhinoplasty procedures. Therefore, we aimed to develop a hybrid treatment model by applying two different structural types of fillers. Hyaluronic acid (HA), a hydrophilic material, and agarose gel (AG), a nonhydrophilic and high G-prime material, were used in the study according to their advantages and disadvantages. Methods: Patients who presented to the office desiring filler treatment for nonsurgical correction of the nose in a 2-year period were enrolled in the study. HA was used intradermally 0.1 ml per each point in the tip defining points and supratip. Injections of 0.4–0.7 and 0.4–0.6 ml AG were used supraperiosteally in the radix and nasal spine, respectively. Clinical improvement was evaluated two weeks later using the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale from 1 to 5 (1: exceptional improvement; 5: worsened patient). Patient satisfaction was evaluated on a scale from 0 to 10 (0: not satisfied; 10: very satisfied). Results: A total of 32 patients (mean age: 27 years) were enrolled in the study. Mean score of patient satisfaction was 9.09 of 10 after injection and 9 of 10 after 2 weeks. Clinical evaluation scores after injection were 1.72 of 5 and 1.69 of 5 on the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale. No major complication was observed. Conclusion: The HA and AG filler hybrid concept applied in different anatomical locations represents a safe and convenient option for nonsurgical rhinoplasty procedures.

show abstract

“… 2 With the increasing popularity of dermal fillers, post-injection complications are becoming more common. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9 , 16 Granulomas and delayed inflammatory reactions to HA fillers occur in about 0.3% of patients and occur 2 weeks to 6 years after injection. 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 13 , 14 Granulomas are characterized by erythema, induration, and edema and can be caused by bacterial or fungal contamination and breakdown of proprietary ingredients or modified HA. 1 , 10 , 11 , 17 “Vycross” cross-linking technology by Allergan uses butanediol diglycidyl ether (BDDE) and small molecular weight HA in its proprietary formula.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%