Neurotoxin Impurities: A Review of Threats to Efficacy

Real-world Implications of Botulinum Neurotoxin A Immunoresistance for Consumers and Aesthetic Practitioners: Insights from ASCEND Multidisciplinary Panel

Background

As long-term, regular aesthetic botulinum neurotoxin A (BoNT-A) use becomes more commonplace, it is vital to understand real-world risk factors and impact of BoNT-A immunoresistance. The first Aesthetic Council on Ethical Use of Neurotoxin Delivery panel discussed issues relating to BoNT-A immunoresistance from the health care professionals' (HCPs') perspective. Understanding the implications of BoNT-A immunoresistance from the aesthetic patient's viewpoint allows HCPs to better support patients throughout their aesthetic treatment journey.

Methods

A real-world consumer study surveyed 363 experienced aesthetic BoNT-A recipients across six Asia-Pacific territories. The survey mapped participants' BoNT-A aesthetic treatment journey and characterized awareness and attitudes relating to BoNT-A immunoresistance and treatment implications. At the second Aesthetic Council on Ethical use of Neurotoxin Delivery meeting, panelists discussed survey findings and developed consensus statements relating to the impact of BoNT-A immunoresistance on the aesthetic treatment journey.

Results

Aesthetic BoNT-A patients' depth of knowledge about BoNT-A immunoresistance remains low, and risk/benefit communications need to be more lay-friendly. The initial consultation is the most important touchpoint for HCPs to raise awareness of BoNT-A immunoresistance as a potential side effect considering increased risk with repeated high-dose treatments. HCPs should be cognizant of differences across BoNT-A formulations due to the presence of certain excipients and pharmacologically unnecessary components that can increase immunogenicity. Standardized screening for clinical signs of secondary nonresponse and a framework for diagnosing and managing immunoresistance-related secondary nonresponse were proposed.

Conclusion

These insights can help patients and HCPs make informed treatment decisions to achieve desired aesthetic outcomes while preserving future treatment options with BoNT-A.

Comparative Study on the Duration and Efficacy of Various Botulinum Toxin Type A Injections for Reducing Masseteric Muscle Bite Force and Treating Facial Wrinkles

OBJECTIVE

Botulinum toxin serotype A (BoNT/A) is widely used for minimal invasive aesthetic treatments. Different brands of BoNT/A exhibit structural variations. The aim of this study was to compare the duration and efficacy of various BoNT/A brands available in Thailand for reducing bite force and treating wrinkles.

METHODS

Fifty participants were randomly assigned to one of five groups, with each group receiving a different BoNT/A brand, namely, incobotulinumtoxinA (IncoA), onabotulinumtoxinA (OnaA), abobotulinumtoxinA (AboA), letibotulinumtoxinA (LetiA), and prabotulinumtoxinA (PraboA). BoNT/A was administered to the masseter muscle and the upper face. Bite force was measured before injection and at 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 weeks post-injection. Evaluation scores for wrinkle improvement were assessed after the treatment.

RESULTS

The most significant reduction in bite force occurred between 2 and 4 weeks post-injection. PraboA demonstrated the most substantial reduction in bite force, while IncoA had the least effect. However, the percentage of bite force reduction did not exhibit statistical significance between BoNT/A types. Additionally, the reduction in bite force for all BoNT/A types was reversed at 4 months post-injection. More than half of the participants experienced improvement beyond 16 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

The structural differences among BoNT/A brands did not significantly affect the longevity and efficacy of bite force reduction and wrinkle treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: TCTR20211205001 (registered 4 Dec 2021).

Complexing Protein-Free Botulinum Neurotoxin A Formulations: Implications of Excipients for Immunogenicity

The formation of neutralizing antibodies is a growing concern in the use of botulinum neurotoxin A (BoNT/A) as it may result in secondary treatment failure. Differences in the immunogenicity of BoNT/A formulations have been attributed to the presence of pharmacologically unnecessary bacterial components. Reportedly, the rate of antibody-mediated secondary non-response is lowest in complexing protein-free (CF) IncobotulinumtoxinA (INCO). Here, the published data and literature on the composition and properties of the three commercially available CF-BoNT/A formulations, namely, INCO, Coretox® (CORE), and DaxibotulinumtoxinA (DAXI), are reviewed to elucidate the implications for their potential immunogenicity. While all three BoNT/A formulations are free of complexing proteins and contain the core BoNT/A molecule as the active pharmaceutical ingredient, they differ in their production protocols and excipients, which may affect their immunogenicity. INCO contains only two immunologically inconspicuous excipients, namely, human serum albumin and sucrose, and has demonstrated low immunogenicity in daily practice and clinical studies for more than ten years. DAXI contains four excipients, namely, L-histidine, trehalosedihydrate, polysorbate 20, and the highly charged RTP004 peptide, of which the latter two may increase the immunogenicity of BoNT/A by introducing neo-epitopes. In early clinical studies with DAXI, antibodies against BoNT/A and RTP004 were found at low frequencies; however, the follow-up period was critically short, with a maximum of three injections. CORE contains four excipients: L-methionine, sucrose, NaCl, and polysorbate 20. Presently, no data are available on the immunogenicity of CORE in human beings. It remains to be seen whether all three CF BoNT/A formulations demonstrate the same low immunogenicity in patients over a long period of time.

Microtoxin for Improving Pore Size, Skin Laxity, Sebum Control, and Scars: A Roundtable on Integrating Intradermal Botulinum Toxin Type A Microdoses Into Clinical Practice

BACKGROUND

In aesthetic clinical practice, botulinum toxin type A (BoNT-A) is best known for its use as a neuromodulator for the treatment of dynamic facial lines; however, when injected intradermally as microdroplets, BoNT-A can improve skin quality and overall skin appearance.

OBJECTIVES

To discuss key aspects of microtoxin use in clinical practice and provide expert guidance on utilization.

METHODS

As part of a continuing medical education lecture series and roundtable, the authors discussed key aspects of microtoxin patient selection, injection technique, and safety.

RESULTS

The experiences of expert faculty are shared here. Clinical experience is consistent with reported data. Microtoxin can be used to reduce pore size, sebum production, rosacea, acne, and fine lines, and to improve jawline and neck definition. Intradermal injection can also be employed for the improvement of transverse neck lines as well as for the safe prevention and management of scars and keloids.

CONCLUSIONS

Expanding the use of BoNT-A, a predictable, minimally invasive, and affordable treatment to address commonly encountered complaints is appealing. The authors have found that making patients aware of microtoxin as a treatment option results in an increased interest in and utilization of BoNT-A, and high satisfaction among appropriately selected patients.

Addressing the Real-World Challenges of Immunoresistance to Botulinum Neurotoxin A in Aesthetic Practice: Insights and Recommendations from a Panel Discussion in Hong Kong

With increasing off-label aesthetic indications using higher botulinum neurotoxin A (BoNT-A) doses and individuals starting treatment at a younger age, particularly in Asia, there is a greater risk of developing immunoresistance to BoNT-A. This warrants more in-depth discussions by aesthetic practitioners to inform patients and guide shared decision-making. A panel comprising international experts and experienced aesthetic practitioners in Hong Kong discussed the implications and impact of immunoresistance to BoNT-A in contemporary aesthetic practice, along with practical strategies for risk management. Following discussions on a clinical case example and the results of an Asia-Pacific consumer study, the panel concurred that it is a priority to raise awareness of the possibility and long-term implications of secondary non-response due to immunoresistance to BoNT-A. Where efficacy and safety are comparable, a formulation with the lowest immunogenicity is preferred. The panel also strongly favored a thorough initial consultation to establish the patient's treatment history, explain treatment side effects, including the causes and consequences of immunoresistance, and discuss treatment goals. Patients look to aesthetic practitioners for guidance, placing an important responsibility on practitioners to adopt risk-mitigating strategies and adequately communicate important risks to patients to support informed and prudent BoNT-A treatment decisions.

Combined Treatment with Micro-Focused Ultrasound with Visualization and Intradermal Incobotulinumtoxin-A for Enlarged Facial Pores: A Retrospective Study in Asians

Background

Despite the increasing need for the improvement of enlarged facial pores, the treatment remains challenging. A few previous studies have reported the effects of micro-focused ultrasound with visualization (MFU-V) or intradermal incobotulinumtoxin-A (INCO) on enlarged facial pores.

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of combined treatment with superficial MFU-V and intradermal INCO for enlarged facial pores.

Methods

This single-center retrospective study included 20 patients treated with MFU-V and intradermal INCO to improve enlarged facial pores. Outcomes were evaluated 1, 4, 12, and 24 weeks after a single session of the combined procedure. Pore count and density were objectively quantitated using a three-dimensional scanner, and improvement was assessed using the physician and patient Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS).

Results

The mean pore count and density decreased after one week and decreased by up to 62% until 24 weeks. After one week, almost all patients (100% in physician GAIS and 95% in patient GAIS) showed improvement with a grade 3 (much improved) or higher. All adverse events were transient.

Conclusion

Combined treatment with MFU-V and intradermal INCO could be effective and safe for reducing enlarged facial pores; the improvements can be sustained for up to 24 weeks.

Sensory Symptoms Associated with Aesthetic Botulinum Toxin A Treatments

A retrospective review of patients who switched from onabotulinumtoxinA (onaA) and/or abobotulinumtoxinA (aboA) to incobotulinumtoxinA (incoA) found anecdotal reports of differences in "feel," including a "lighter" feel or treatment-associated tightness. We surveyed the frequency of these sensations as an initial proof of concept of toxin proprioception among our patients who switched toxins.

METHODS

Seventy-nine patients who had past facial aesthetic treatments with more than one botulinum toxin A (BoNT/A) formulation completed a questionnaire on their experience of treatment-associated sensations, including stiffness or a frozen feeling.

RESULTS

Treatment-associated sensations of tightness (47.3%), headache (41.8%), heaviness (38.2%), feeling frozen (29.1%), stiffness (20.0%), and weakness (20.0%) were reported by 55 of 79 patients. Furthermore, 78.2% of 55 patients noted an interformulation sensory difference. Of 79 patients surveyed, 68.4% of onaA-treated patients associated sensations with onaA, 39.1% of aboA-treated patients associated sensations with aboA, and 12.2% of incoA-treated patients associated sensations with incoA.

CONCLUSIONS

Some patients reported a different feel between toxins, and the difference in frequency of treatment-associated sensation varies between the different formulations used. Given the fine coordination of facial expressive muscles, we suspect that associated proprioceptive afferents are involved. Our findings confirm that post-toxin treatment-associated sensations can be detected by some patients, and this is likely due to the variations between the formulations. Failing to advise patients of this before switching formulations may cause a misperception that the treatment is not working well or that its effect has worn off prematurely, and some patients may consider switching formulations to reduce these conscious proprioceptive sensations.

Safety Profile and Lack of Immunogenicity of IncobotulinumtoxinA in Pediatric Spasticity and Sialorrhea: A Pooled Analysis

IncobotulinumtoxinA, a pure botulinumtoxinA formulation, is free of accessory proteins. This analysis provides pooled safety data from phase 3 trials of children/adolescents (2–17 years), investigating incobotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of spasticity associated with cerebral palsy (at doses ≤20 U/kg (max. 500 U) per injection cycle (IC) for ≤6 ICs; three trials) or sialorrhea associated with neurologic disorders (at total doses of 20–75 U per IC for ≤4 ICs; one trial) for ≤96 weeks. Safety endpoints included the incidences of different types of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and immunogenicity. IncobotulinumtoxinA dose groups were combined. Of 1159 patients (mean age 7.3 years, 60.4% males) treated with incobotulinumtoxinA, 3.9% experienced treatment-related TEAEs, with the most common being injection site reactions (1.3%) (both indications), muscular weakness (0.7%) (spasticity), and dysphagia (0.2%) (sialorrhea). Two patients (0.2%) experienced a treatment-related treatment-emergent serious adverse event, and 0.3% discontinued the study due to treatment-related TEAEs. No botulinumtoxinA-naïve patients developed neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) after incobotulinumtoxinA. All children/adolescents with known pre-treatment status and testing positive for Nabs at final visit (n = 7) were previously treated with a botulinumtoxinA other than incobotulinumtoxinA. IncobotulinumtoxinA was shown to be safe, with very few treatment-related TEAEs in a large, diverse cohort of children/adolescents with chronic conditions requiring long-term treatment and was without new NAb formation in treatment-naïve patients.

Causes of Botulinum Toxin Treatment Failure

Purpose

The purpose of this article is to review the cause of botulinum toxin (BT) failure and determine the ways to minimize the risks of its occurrence.

Methods

A PubMed and Google Scholar literature search was conducted with the search terms botulinum toxin, treatment, failure, causes, and prevention. Fifteen relevant articles were found and used as the scientific base for this article.

Results

The failure of BT therapy is associated with immunogenic and non-immunogenic causes and the formation of neutralizing antibodies toward the active components of BT or the complexing proteins. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) testing and mouse hemidiaphragm assay (MHA) can diagnose the failure. The risk of developing treatment failure can be minimized by using complexing protein-free formulations, selecting a treatment regimen with the least immunogenicity, proper injection technique, and gentle product handling.

Conclusion

The treatment failure can compromise the success of BT treatment. Current medical literature shows controversial evidence for and against BT immunogenicity. Therefore, the cause of BT failure is likely to be multifactorial.

Emerging Trends in Botulinum Neurotoxin A Resistance: An International Multidisciplinary Review and Consensus

Botulinum neurotoxin A (BoNT-A) injection is the most widely performed aesthetic procedure and a first-line therapeutic option for various medical conditions. The potential for BoNT-A immunoresistance and secondary nonresponse related to neutralizing antibody (NAb) formation warrants attention as the range of BoNT-A aesthetic applications continues to expand.

Methods

An international multidisciplinary panel reviewed published evidence on BoNT-A immunoresistance in aesthetic and therapeutic applications and discussed best practices integrating clinical, ethical, and aesthetic considerations. Consensus statements relating to awareness, assessment, and management of the risk of NAb-related secondary nonresponse in aesthetic practice were developed.

Results

There was a consensus that, as doses used in aesthetic practice become like those in therapeutics, rates of NAb formation may be expected to increase. However, the true extent of NAb formation in aesthetics is likely underestimated due to limitations of published evidence and variability in treatment patterns of aesthetic patients. Since BoNT-A therapy is often lifelong, practitioners need to recognize immunogenicity as a potential complication that might affect future therapeutic use and strive to minimize modifiable risk factors. The selection and use of a BoNT-A product with the least immunogenic potential from the beginning may thus be advantageous, especially when treatment with high doses is planned.

Conclusions

In view of current trends in BoNT-A aesthetic use, it is essential for practitioners to conduct thorough clinical assessments, inform patients of treatment risks, and develop BoNT-A treatment plans to minimize immunogenicity. This can help preserve the option of continued or future BoNT-A treatment with satisfactory outcomes.

Insights on Skin Quality and Clinical Practice Trends in Asia Pacific and a Practical Guide to Good Skin Quality from the Inside Out

OBJECTIVE

We sought to examine the current skin quality trends and gaps in clinical practice in the Asia Pacific region and develop a practical guide to improve skin quality.

METHODS

Medical practitioners from 11 countries in the Asia Pacific region completed an online survey on current trends in skin quality treatment. A panel of 12 leading experts convened for a virtual meeting to develop a practical guide for skin quality improvement.

RESULTS

A total of 153 practitioners completed the survey. The four most common skin quality issues were uneven skin tone, skin surface unevenness, skin laxity, and sebaceous gland hyperactivity and enlarged pores. Most practitioners reported using a combination of treatment modalities for each skin quality issue. It was also observed that each treatment modality could be used to treat several skin quality issues. A multimodal approach targeting different interrelated issues across the tissue planes was recommended for balanced results. The panel developed a practical guide for the appropriate combinations and sequence of treatments, and created treatment protocols for specific skin quality outcome goals. The guide employed an "inside-out" approach, treating the deeper tissue planes prior to the superficial layers to achieve harmonious results.

LIMITATIONS

Future studies are needed to support the recommended treatment protocols for skin quality improvement.

CONCLUSION

These findings provide valuable insights on current skin quality trends and gaps in clinical practice. The practical guide provides a framework for practitioners to customize their treatment plan according to each patient's needs.

Efficacy and Safety of Letibotulinumtoxin A in the Treatment of Glabellar Lines: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter, Placebo-Controlled Phase 3 Study

BACKGROUND

Letibotulinumtoxin A (Hugel, Inc., Chuncheon, Republic of Korea and CROMA Pharma, Leobendorf, Austria) is a newly manufactured neurotoxin derived from Clostridium botulinum strain CBFC26.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of letibotulinumtoxin A in reducing glabellar line severity (GLS) and to evaluate long-term safety and efficacy following repeated injections.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled Phase III clinical trial, 355 subjects with moderate to severe glabella frown lines received injections of 20 U of letibotulinumtoxin A or placebo. GLS, onset and duration of effect, time to retreatment, and adverse events were evaluated. Response to treatment was defined as a GLS score of 0 or 1 (assessed by the subject and the investigator) and an improvement at Week 4 of ≥2 points in GLS score relative to baseline.

RESULTS

At 4 weeks, 78.6% of the active treatment subjects were responders based on the investigator's assessment and 68.8% based on the subject's assessment, resulting in a composite responder rate of 64.7% for the active treatment group, whereas the corresponding rate was 0.0% in the placebo group (P < 0.001). Subjects noted a substantial improvement in GL severity as early as Day 2, with the median time to onset of effect being 3 days. The mean [standard deviation] time until first retreatment for the letibotulinumtoxin A group was 127.26 [65.6] days. Letibotulinumtoxin A was well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Letibotulinumtoxin A demonstrates high efficacy and a convincing safety profile in the treatment of glabellar lines.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2

Immunogenicity Associated with Aesthetic Botulinumtoxin A: A Survey of Asia-Pacific Physicians' Experiences and Recommendations

Background:

Most botulinum toxin A (BoNT/A) products contain unnecessary bacterial components that increase the risk of developing neutralizing antibodies (nAbs). Reports of secondary nonresponse and treatment failures (STF) due to nAbs have accompanied a surge in new BoNT/A products.

Methods:

To formulate recommendations on managing toxin resistance, we reviewed the evidence on BoNT/A-associated immunogenicity and evaluated Asian physicians' current BoNT/A practices, knowledge, and real-world experiences, as provided by survey outcomes conducted with 128 Asian experts (regular botulinum toxin injectors).

Results:

Most doctors believe STF occurs, some patients exhibit partial symptoms, and impurities (eg, complexing proteins) in BoNT/A preparations risk STF. Bioassays that distinguish non-nAbs from nAbs that hinder toxin function remain unavailable to most doctors, though most would perform testing if given the option. Doctors in the Asia-Pacific region have differing strategies for managing STF, depending on the availability of alternatives or tests. They recommended switching to a highly-purified formulation free of complexing proteins and other impurities to lower the risk of immunogenicity, or offering treatment holidays of 2 -2.5 years. They suggested restarting treatment with the same highly purified formulation, especially for repeated treatments, large-dose injections, and younger patients who will accumulate higher lifetime doses, so as to minimize immunogenic risks and preserve long-term treatment outcomes. Importantly, doctors should always initiate patients on pure formulations rather than switching to these only after resistance develops.

Conclusion:

Choosing highly purified BoNT/A products at treatment initiation enhances long-term efficacy and patient satisfaction while minimizing the risk of immune activation and nAb formation.

Immunogenicity of botulinum toxin

Botulinum toxin treatment is the most common non-surgical cosmetic treatment. Although there are many available treatments using botulinum toxin, their effects are temporary and repeated injections are required. These frequent injections can trigger an immunological response. In addition, botulinum toxin acts as an antigen in the body; thus, its effect disappears progressively due to this immunological reaction, which may cause treatment failure. Active botulinum toxin consists of a core neurotoxin and complexing proteins, the exact effects of which remain unclear. However, the complexing proteins are closely related to the immune response and the formation of neutralizing antibodies. Since neutralizing antibodies can lead to treatment failure, their formation should be prevented. Furthermore, various methods of detecting neutralizing antibodies have been used to predict treatment failure.

Immunogenicity of Botulinum Toxin Formulations: Potential Therapeutic Implications

Botulinum neurotoxins (BoNTs) are proteins produced by bacteria of the Clostridium family. Upon oral ingestion, BoNT causes the neuroparalytic syndrome botulism. There are seven serotypes of BoNT (serotypes A-G); BoNT-A and BoNT-B are the botulinum toxin serotypes utilized for therapeutic applications. Treatment with BoNT injections is used to manage chronic medical conditions across multiple indications. As with other biologic drugs, immunogenicity after long-term treatment with BoNT formulations may occur, and repeated use can elicit antibody formation leading to clinical nonresponsiveness. Thus, approaching BoNT treatment of chronic conditions with therapeutic formulations that minimize stimulating the host immune response while balancing patient responsiveness to therapy is ideal. Immunogenicity is a clinical limitation in many settings that use biologic drugs for treatment, and clinically relevant immunogenicity reduction has been achieved through engineering smaller protein constructs and reducing unnecessary formulation components. A similar approach has influenced the evolution of BoNT formulations. Three BoNT-A products and one BoNT-B product have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for therapeutic use: onabotulinumtoxinA, abobotulinumtoxinA, incobotulinumtoxinA, and rimabotulinumtoxinB; a fourth BoNT-A product, daxibotulinumtoxinA, is currently under regulatory review. Additionally, prabotulinumtoxinA is a BoNT-A product that has been approved for aesthetic indications but not therapeutic use. Here, we discuss the preclinical and clinical immunogenicity data that exist within the scientific literature and provide a perspective for considering immunogenicity as a key factor in choice of BoNT formulation.

Safety verification for polysorbate 20, pharmaceutical excipient for intramuscular administration, in Sprague-Dawley rats and New Zealand White rabbits

Human serum albumin (HSA) has been widely used as a pharmaceutical excipient in Botulinum toxin serotype A (BoNT/A) products that are indicated for use in therapeutics and cosmetics. However, HSA as a human-derived material has some concerns, such as the potential risk of transmission of infectious agents, an insufficient supply, and difficulty in maintaining a certain quality. For those reasons, newly developed BoNT/A products (CORETOX^®, Medytox, Inc., Republic of Korea) contained polysorbate 20, a non-human-derived excipient, to replace the HSA. However, most safety studies of polysorbate 20 have been conducted with non-invasive routes of administration, and thus there are a few studies on the safety of polysorbate 20 when administered intramuscularly. To secure the in vivo safety profile of polysorbate 20, a four-week repeated intramuscular dose toxicity study (0.02, 0.1, and 0.4 mg/kg, one injection every two weeks for a total of three injections) was conducted in 66 Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats. An intradermal irritation study was further conducted with 18 New Zealand White (NZW) rabbits. The toxicological evaluation of HSA (0.06 and 0.12 mg/kg) was also carried out as a comparative substance. Systemic and local toxicities were not observed in any of the SD rats or NZW rabbits based on clinical signs, body weight, hematology, clinical biochemistry, macroscopic findings on necropsy, histopathology of the injection site, and allergic reactions. The current study suggested that intramuscular administration of polysorbate 20 was considered to be safe at a level similar to that of HSA, which has an in vivo safety profile accumulated over the years. This provided the basis for the in vivo safety profile of polysorbate 20 administered intramuscularly and the scientific reliability of the use of polysorbate 20 as an alternative to HSA, which is used as an excipient for various pharmaceuticals in terms of its safety.

[New botulinum toxins for aesthetic dermatology : A comprehensive review]

Facial rejuvenation is gaining immense popularity among patients and clinicians. Botulinum toxins derived from bacteria are well-tolerated options as minimally invasive interventions for facial rejuvenation or other aesthetic procedures. These products have revolutionized aesthetic treatments. Several types of botulinum toxins (BoNT) are available. Currently type A and B are clinically used and only BoNT‑A products are approved for use for cosmetic indications in the Germany and the United States. Each product is unique in terms of its composition. Understanding the various BoNT‑A products is essential in choosing the optimal treatment for our patients. In this article we discuss different BoNT‑A products used for aesthetic intervention.

The Use of Botulinum Toxin A in the Management of Trigeminal Neuralgia: a Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this article is to systematically review the use, efficacy, differences between botulinum toxin type A doses and side effects of botulinum toxin type A therapy in patients with trigeminal neuralgia.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The search for the performed reviews was done in PubMed and Cochrane library in English language from January 2010 up to February 2020. Inclusion criteria: full-text studies in English language, in which visual assessment scale (VAS) was present, in which patients with trigeminal neuralgia (TN) were participated and the comparison between botulinum toxin type A (BT-A) and saline was done.

RESULTS

The review included 4 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials with 8 to 12 weeks follow-up to observe changes in VAS and in frequency of TN attacks, differences between dosages of BT-A in therapy and side effects. Mean VAS of BT-A group decreased by approximately 68% and of palcebo group decreased by approximately 21.6% after the therapy. Mean frequency of TN attacks in 3 studies of BT-A group decreased by 85%, while in palcebo by only 15.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Botulinum toxin type A injection therapy is a safe and effective method in management of trigeminal neuralgia. No differences between dosages of botulinum toxin type A were found. Maximum efficacy was noticed between 6 weeks and 3 months after the procedure. Side effects were mostly facial asymmetry after injection, headaches, haematoma, which disappeared in one week.