Increased risk of late-onset, immune-mediated, adverse reactions related to dermal fillers in patients bearing HLA-B*08 and DRB1*03 haplotypes

Late-Onset Reactions after Hyaluronic Acid Dermal Fillers: A Consensus Recommendation on Etiology, Prevention and Management

Hyaluronic acid (HA) dermal fillers, generally considered low-risk, can lead to rare late-onset reactions (LORs) manifesting between 3 and 4 months postinjection, occasionally even as early as 24 h postinjection. The Complication Assessment and Risk Evaluation (CARE) board was established to review these reactions. In this publication, the authors aims to explore the etiological hypotheses underlying LORs, associated risk factors, prevention, and management approaches suggested by the CARE board. The CARE board identified three etiological hypotheses contributing to LORs. Firstly, the physicochemical structure of the filler, particularly low molecular weight HA, which may trigger an immune response. Secondly, infection, potentially introduced during injection or by dormant biofilm activation. Lastly, an imbalance in the host immune system, caused by factors like autoimmune diseases or viral infections, may lead to extended foreign body reactions, delayed type IV hypersensitivity, or adjuvant-based reactions. Based on these hypotheses, the board categorized various risk factors as patient-related (e.g., recent dental treatment, current medical status, active autoimmune disease), product-related (e.g., molecular weight), and procedure-related (e.g., aseptic technique and trauma). To reduce the risk of LORs, the CARE board recommends diligent patient selection, including comprehensive medical history assessment and informed consent. Practitioners should maintain an effective aseptic technique, and choose an appropriate product and injection depth for the anatomical location. Post-procedure, patients should receive education on proper filler care. Management of LORs depends on the suspected etiology, and the CARE board has proposed an algorithm to determine the most appropriate treatment. Hyaluronidase is recommended for noninflammatory reactions in the absence of active infection, while watchful waiting and/or steroid treatment may be preferred for inflammatory reactions. Hyaluronidase is not recommended as a first-line treatment for infections, which require drainage, bacterial culture, and antibiotic treatment. However, the board emphasizes the need for individualized evaluation and treatment in all cases.

Clinical Management With High-Frequency Ultrasound of Recurrent Submental Abscess Formation After Filler Placement: Bacterial Contamination or Immune-Mediated Adverse Event?

The authors present a case of a 29-year-old female patient with a recurrent submental abscess formation after chin augmentation with highly reticulated hyaluronic acid filler. We evaluate the possible cause of this complication and the result after clinical management with ultrasound-guided injection of hyaluronidase. We highlight the prevention, assessment and treatment with real-time imaging of hyaluronidase injection in the affected area, as a predictable approach for both the patient and the physician.

A Comparative Analysis of Local and Systemic Immunological Biomarkers in Females With Breast Implants and Capsular Contracture

Background

The etiology of capsular contracture (CC), the most common complication following breast augmentation, remains unclear. Chronic, fibrotic inflammation resulting in excessive fibrosis has been proposed as a potential mechanism.

Objectives

In this study, we aimed to investigate the relation between biomarkers that are associated with inflammation and fibrosis and the severity of CC.

Methods

Fifty healthy females were categorized into 3 groups: females with no-to-mild CC (Baker 1-2; n = 15), females with severe CC (Baker 3-4; n = 20), and a control group awaiting breast augmentation (n = 15). We assessed 5 biomarkers (galectin-1 [Gal-1], interferon-β [INF-β], interferon-γ [INF-γ], interleukin-6 [IL-6], and tumor necrosis factor-α [TNF-α]) in breast implant capsules and serum samples.

Results

No significant differences in intracapsular cytokine levels were observed between the Baker 1-2 and the Baker 3-4 groups, as the levels were generally low and, in some cases, almost undetectable. In the blood samples, no significant differences in Gal-1, INF-γ, IL-6, or TNF-α levels were found within the 3 groups. We identified significantly increased levels of INF-β (P = .009) in the blood samples of females with severe CC, driven mainly by 3 extremely high values.

Conclusions

The cytokines assessed in this study did not reflect the degree of CC among females with silicone breast implants. However, 3 females with severe CC, who all had prolonged silicone exposure, showed extremely elevated levels of INF-β in their serum samples. This possible association between prolonged silicone exposure and systemic inflammation in some females should be further investigated.

Level of Evidence 3

Safety of esthetic procedures in rheumatic patients: single-center survey of patients

The popularity of esthetic medicine is growing every year, also among patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIRD). The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety of esthetic medicine (AM) procedures in patients with AIRD. A semi-structured, anonymous questionnaire regarding rheumatic and concomitant diseases and AM procedures was distributed among adult patients hospitalized in the rheumatology department or attending outpatient clinic in the National Institute of Geriatrics, Rheumatology, and Rehabilitation, Warsaw. The main outcome was the occurrence of an adverse event. A number of 512 patients took part in the survey and 15 were excluded (AM procedure preceded the diagnosis of AIRD). The study group consisted of 497 patients, of whom 47 had undergone AM procedures. The procedures performed included: tattooing (22 patients), piercing (16 patients), hyaluronic acid (7 patients), botulinum toxin (5 patients) injections, laser procedures (6 patients), plastic surgery (4 patients), mesotherapy (3 patients) and others. The vast majority of patients had these performed during remission or low disease activity. 70.2% of patients received treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) during the AM procedure, with TNF-alfa inhibitors being the most common (63.6%). Adverse events occurred in 15% of patients. All were mild and transient site reactions. Most patients would like to repeat the AM procedure in the future. The use of esthetic medicine procedures in patients with AIRD, including those treated with biologic DMARDs, was associated with a risk of mild site reactions. Most of the patients expressed satisfaction with the results of the AM procedure.

Etiology of Delayed Inflammatory Reaction Induced by Hyaluronic Acid Filler

The etiology and pathophysiology of delayed inflammatory reactions caused by hyaluronic acid fillers have not yet been elucidated. Previous studies have suggested that the etiology can be attributed to the hyaluronic acid filler itself, patient's immunological status, infection, and injection technique. Hyaluronic acid fillers are composed of high-molecular weight hyaluronic acids that are chemically cross-linked using substances such as 1,4-butanediol diglycidyl ether (BDDE). The mechanism by which BDDE cross-links the two hyaluronic acid disaccharides is still unclear and it may exist as a fully reacted cross-linker, pendant cross-linker, deactivated cross-linker, and residual cross-linker. The hyaluronic acid filler also contains impurities such as silicone oil and aluminum during the manufacturing process. Impurities can induce a foreign body reaction when the hyaluronic acid filler is injected into the body. Aseptic hyaluronic acid filler injections should be performed while considering the possibility of biofilm formation or delayed inflammatory reaction. Delayed inflammatory reactions tend to occur when patients experience flu-like illnesses; thus, the patient's immunological status plays an important role in delayed inflammatory reactions. Large-bolus hyaluronic acid filler injections can induce foreign body reactions and carry a relatively high risk of granuloma formation.

Adverse reactions to cosmetic implants after COVID-19 vaccination: A literature review

BACKGROUND

As the world's population of people vaccinated with the COVID-19 vaccine increases, adverse reactions are increasingly being reported. There have been progressive reports of the effects of COVID-19 vaccination on cosmetic fillers or prostheses, but they have not been reviewed based on their clinical morphologic patterns. This article reviewed the progress of research on adverse reactions to cosmetic implants after COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

We researched the English-language literature up to October 15, 2022, using predefined keywords to identify relevant studies about adverse reactions to cosmetic implants after the COVID-19 vaccination, collecting patient characteristics, implant type, the time interval between vaccination and implantation or injection, time of onset, symptoms, treatments, and outcomes.

RESULTS

Among the adverse reactions to implants associated with COVID-19 vaccination, we distinguished between (1) injectable fillers and (2) surgical prosthetic implants. The most common adverse reactions were at the site of hyaluronic acid injection and breast prosthesis after Pfizer vaccination, mainly DIRs, and mainly manifested as edema, rash, fever, and capsular contracture. This paper also reported the possible causes, treatments of DIRs, and limitations of current studies.

CONCLUSIONS

In this article, we attempted to investigate and discuss all the adverse reactions of cosmetic implants related to COVID-19 vaccination in the current literature, to unmask these reactions and make a more accurate assessment of vaccine safety.

No association found between late-onset inflammatory adverse events after soft tissue filler injections and the adaptive immune system

BACKGROUND

To date, it is unknown why some individuals develop late-onset inflammatory adverse events after treatment with fillers. These events may result from various factors, including an immunological response of the adaptive immune system.

OBJECTIVE

In a pilot study, we looked for evidence that is there a relation between late-onset inflammatory adverse events and the presence of immune cells surrounding the injected filler.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We included 47 patients, of whom 20 experienced late-onset inflammatory adverse events to different fillers (inflammatory group) and 27 who did not (reference group). A biopsy was taken from the area of the adverse event. Hematoxylin-eosin staining and immunohistochemistry analysis with CD3 (T-cells) and CD68 (macrophages) on paraffin tissue sections was used to assess the biopsies.

RESULTS

Immune cells were found in biopsies obtained from 18 of 47 patients: Nine biopsies from the inflammation group and nine from the reference group. All these 18 cases showed CD68-positive immune cells. Virtually no CD3-positive immune cells were found.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that there is no T-cell activity in biopsies from areas with late-onset adverse events after filler injections. The macrophages found in the biopsies are probably not responsible for the inflammatory response.

Are Delayed Dermal Filler Granulomas More Common Since COVID-19?

PURPOSE

Granuloma and delayed inflammatory reaction to hyaluronic acid facial esthetic fillers occurs rarely. More recently, these reactions have been reported with increasing frequency and have been associated with COVID-19 infection. The purpose of the study is to determine if delayed filler granulomas are more common after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study including of all patients treated with dermal filler at 4 offices of a single cosmetic surgery practice between August 1, 2018 and October 31, 2021 was performed. The primary outcome variable was granuloma formation. The primary predictor variable was time period, either pre-COVID (8/1/18 to 2/29/20) or post-COVID (3/1/20 to 10/31/21). Other study variables recorded were age, amounts of dermal fillers used, and types of dermal filler used. Data were analyzed using chi-squared test, t-tests, and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Over the study period, 3,255 patients receiving 8,067 syringes of filler over 6,800 sessions were reviewed. The average patient age was 46.8 ± 13.7 years and 2,583 sessions were performed in the pre-COVID time period and 4,217 sessions in the post-COVID time period. There were 11 granulomas in 9 subjects receiving filler in the post-COVID time period and 0 granulomas in the pre-COVID time period (0.3% vs 0.0%, respectively, P = .009). Juvederm Vollure was used in 64% of patients who developed granulomas but only accounted for 26% of filler administrations in the post-COVID time period and 28% in the cohort overall (P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Granuloma formation is a rare complication of hyaluronic acid filler injection that appears to be occurring with more frequency following the COVID-19 pandemic. Practitioners who administer dermal fillers should be aware of this complication and its apparent increased incidence.

COVID-19 vaccines and filler reactions: Should it be considered as a concern?

BACKGROUND

Any implant or external material used in the body tissues can potentially be followed by autoimmune or inflammatory reactions. With the global vaccination program against COVID-19, the reports of tissue filler reactions would be increasingly demonstrated.

AIM

To summarize the data regarding COVID vaccination and filler reactions.

METHOD

We reviewed the existing data in this regard through searching on PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus. All of the relevant papers published until March 2022, which we could access to their fulltexts were included.

RESULTS

Here, we summarized the data regarding COVID-19 vaccination and filler reactions and discussed its etiopathogenesis, management, and importance.

CONCLUSION

Although the end of pandemic was announced, the necessity of continuing COVI-D19 vaccination in future mandates gathering data regarding safety of vaccines.

[Translated article] COVID-19 and Dermal Fillers: Should We Really Be Concerned?

SARS-CoV-2 has caused millions of infections and deaths worldwide and case numbers continue to rise. Besides the effect of the virus on key organs – leading to respiratory illness, anosmia, diarrhea, and fever and other complications – delayed inflammatory reactions to hyaluronic acid dermal fillers, mainly in the face, have also been reported to occur after confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections and in vaccinated individuals. While delayed inflammatory reactions tend to be self-limiting, they should be diagnosed and treated with corticosteroids, hyaluronidase, and/or antibiotics when necessary. The inflammation is generally not severe, yet these complications are classified as serious adverse events by the US Food and Drug Administration. They appear to be delayed type IV hypersensitivity reactions triggered by the immune system in the presence of SARS-CoV-2 or other viruses, such as those causing influenza, although the underlying mechanisms have not been fully elucidated. Because the longevity of dermal fillers is increasing, while the pandemic continues to evolve and new vaccines are under development, the long-term effects on hyaluronic acid fillers and other bioimplant materials should be studied. Physicians must also be encouraged to report these reactions, however mild, to ensure accurate records.

COVID y rellenos faciales ¿realmente debemos preocuparnos?

La pandemia por COVID ha causado hoy en día millones de afectados, continuando su aumento a nivel mundial. Junto con la afectación los órganos diana clave (aparato respiratorio, anosmia, diarrea, fiebre, etc.), se han descrito reacciones inmunológicas tardías en los rellenos dérmicos por ácido hialurónico (AH), fundamentalmente a nivel facial. Estas alteraciones aparecen tanto en pacientes positivos para el virus, independientemente de la sintomatología sistémica, como en pacientes que han recibido vacunación frente al SARS-CoV-2. Aunque las reacciones suelen ser autolimitadas y autoresolutivas, es importante saber diagnosticarlas y en ocasiones establecer tratamiento con corticoides, hialuronidasa y/o antibióticos. Aunque no son graves, la Administración de Alimentos y Medicamentos de los Estados Unidos (FDA) las ha clasificado como evento adverso serio. Los mecanismos que originan están reacciones no están completamente dilucidados. Parece que son reacciones de hipersensibilidad retardada tipo IV, favorecidas por estímulos inmunológicos que se activan en presencia de la COVID o de otros virus como la gripe. Sin embargo, dado que los rellenos presentan cada vez mayor durabilidad y a que la pandemia continúa su curso, existiendo nuevas vacunas en desarrollo, es esencial la realización de estudios que describan la evolución a largo plazo tanto de los rellenos de AH, como de otros bioimplantes. Así mismo, es esencial alentar a los médicos de que reporten este tipo de reacciones, aunque no revistan gravedad con el objetivo de poder realizar un registro fidedigno de ellas.

Inflammatory immune-mediated adverse reactions induced by COVID-19 vaccines in previously injected patients with soft tissue fillers: a case-series of 20 patients

Background

Adverse events (AE) after COVID‐19 vaccines, particularly, but not solely, with those messenger RNA (mRNA)‐based vaccines, have rarely been reported in patients previously treated with dermal fillers (DF).

Objective

To evaluate the morphology, clinical characteristics, the timing of presentation, and outcomes of inflammatory AE appeared in patients injected with DF, after anti‐COVID‐19 vaccination.

Methods

Descriptive study of a case series of 20 consecutive patients collected after the occurrence of AE in previously filled areas post COVID‐19 vaccination.

Results

From January 2021 to July 2021, we analyzed 20 AE reactions triggered by COVID‐19 vaccines in the previously mentioned cohort. They were vaccinated with Pfizer/Biontech (11; 55%), Moderna (5; 25%), Astra‐Zeneca (3; 15%), and Sputnik (1; 5%). The most common manifestations were oedema/swelling, angioedema, erythema, skin induration, and granuloma. Less common reactions included myalgia and lymphadenopathy. In 13/20 (65%) cases, the AE appeared after the first dose of vaccine. These inflammatory AE appeared more rapidly after the second dose than after the first one. In 13/20 (65%) cases, the symptomatology subsided with anti‐inflammatory/antihistaminic drugs, while spontaneously in 3/20 (15%). The manifestations are ongoing.in the remaining four cases (20%).

Conclusion

Although probably rare, both RNA‐based and adenovirus‐based anti‐COVID‐19 vaccines can cause inflammatory bouts in patients previously treated with DF. In these cases, caution should be paid on subsequent vaccine doses, considering a tailored risk/benefit for any case before next vaccination.

A systematic review on COVID-19 vaccination and cosmetic filler reactions: A focus on case studies and original articles

Background

Tissue fillers are among the most popular cosmetic procedures performed and notably, cases of filler reactions after COVID‐19 vaccination have been reported.

Objective

The objective was to determine the characteristics of patients with filler reaction after COVID‐19 vaccination and address several considerations that have to be taken into practice.

Methods

A PRISMA compliant systematic search was conducted in Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed/MEDLINE databases for articles published from inception up to October 21, 2021.

Results

Out of 106 initially retrieved articles, four of them were included in our study, and a total number of 13 cases were analyzed. In this study, we found that all of the patients who developed delayed‐type reaction (DTR) following COVID‐19 vaccination were middle‐aged women without any known history of allergy to foods or drugs. All patients had a history of hyaluronic acid (HA) filler injection in their head and neck and demonstrated symptoms particularly swelling, from <1 day up to 10 days after the first or second doses of vaccines. Lisinopril, hyaluronidase, and corticosteroids seemed to have good results in management.

Conclusion

Although rare, DTR to fillers after COVID‐19 vaccination can happen. Physicians should be aware of the pathogenesis and management of this phenomenon.

Late inflammatory reactions (LIRs) in patients with soft tissue fillers after SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination: A systematic review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Soft tissue fillers are used for cosmetic and reconstructive purposes, and soft tissue filler procedures are among the most common nonsurgical procedures in the USA. Although soft tissue filler procedures are relatively quick and safe, adverse events such as late inflammatory reactions have been reported with every filler product. Infections and vaccinations have been proposed as potential triggers for late inflammatory reactions (LIRs), and it is therefore not surprising that these adverse events have been reported after SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination. Therefore, this review aims to give a detailed overview of these cases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was undertaken on LIRs in patients with a history of soft tissue filler use after SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination. This systematic review was reported according to the PRISMA guidelines. We searched the electronic database PubMed from January 2020-August 2021. Data on patient characteristics, filler characteristics, clinical findings and treatment options were included.

RESULTS

This review included 7 articles with a total of 19 patients with LIRs after SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination. Three patients with postinfection LIRs and 16 patients with postvaccination LIRs were reported. These LIRS mainly occurred in females who had HA injections for cosmetic purposes. Three patients with postinfection LIRs had symptoms of facial swelling and/or lip angioedema in a matter of weeks. Sixteen patients reported reactions after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (13 following Moderna vaccination and 3 after Pfizer vaccination, after both the first and second doses) from 13 hours up to three weeks. These patients presented with similar clinical symptoms as patients with postinfection LIRs. All patients were treated in a conservative manner.

DISCUSSION

This review shows a relationship between LIRs and SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination. In the case of vaccination, these adverse events have been reported only after Moderna and Pfizer vaccinations. The reported adverse events are generally minor and self-limiting, and we encourage patients with soft tissue fillers to participate in vaccination programs.

The Immunogenicity of Hyaluronic Fillers and Its Consequences

Hyaluronic acid (HA) is a glycosaminoglycan, a natural component of the extracellular matrix. The identical structure of the molecule in all living organisms is its main advantage, as it translates into the minimal probability of immunogenicity. Therefore, it is the closest to the ideal preparation used as a filler, due to its biocompatibility and stability at the site of implantation. This paper includes the discussion of the potential mechanisms of adverse immune reactions to HA along with the mechanisms of reaction following vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2. Based on the literature, we tried to systematize adverse immune reactions with systemic manifestations to HA. The occurrence of unpredictable reactions to hyaluronic acid indicates that they may not be treated as neutral or non-allergenic. The modifications of the chemical structure of HA, additives and individual tendencies in a patient may be the cause of unpredictable reactions, leading to serious health consequences. Preparations of unknown origin, poorly purified, or including bacterial DNA are particularly dangerous. Therefore, long-lasting follow-up of the patient and the selection of a preparation approved by the FDA or EMA are of high importance. Patients are often unaware of the consequences of cheaper procedures performed by persons without suitable knowledge with the use of unregistered products, so the public should be educated and legal regulations should be introduced.

The 10-Point Plan 2021: Updated Concepts for Improved Procedural Safety During Facial Filler Treatments

Dermal filler treatments require constant reassessment for improving and safeguarding the rapidly evolving aesthetic field. Suboptimal injection technique, patient selection and product knowledge have touted a concerning increase in filler complications, with new challenges such as the COVID-19 pandemic leading to new paradigms in the understanding, prevention, diagnosis and treatment of complications. The updated 10-point plan has been developed to curtail complications through consideration of causative factors, categorized as patient, product, and procedure-related. Patient-related factors include a preprocedural consultation with careful elucidation of skin conditions (acne, rosacea, dermatitis), systemic disease (allergies, autoimmune disease, underlying bacterial and viral disease (herpes simplex virus, COVID-19 infection), medications (antineoplastic drugs, recreational drugs) and previous cosmetic procedures (including fillers and energy-based devices). Patient assessment should include standardized photography and also evaluate the role of social media, ethnicity, gender, generational, and LGBTQ+ needs. Specified informed consent for both adverse events and their treatment is essential due to the increase in vascular complications, including the risk of blindness. Product-related factors include the powerful advantage of reversibility when using hyaluronic acid (HA) products. Product characteristics such as molecular weight and filler degradation should be understood. Product layering over late or minimally degradable fillers is still inadvisable due to the initial filler being teased into reactivity. Procedural factors such as consistent photographic documentation, procedural planning, aseptic non-touch technique (ANTT), knowledge of topographical anatomy and angiosomes, and technical dexterity including pinch anatomy and needle skills are of pivotal importance. The final section is dedicated to algorithms and checklists for managing and treating complications such as allergic hypersensitivity reactions, vascular events, infection, edema and late-onset adverse events (LOAEs). The updated 10-point plan is a methodical strategy aimed at further minimising the risk of dermal filler complications.

Cutaneous adverse effects of the available COVID-19 vaccines

Vaccination has played a crucial role in the improvement of global health. Some of the world's deadliest diseases, like smallpox and rinderpest, have been eradicated with the help of vaccines, and many others have been restrained. The appearance of the strain of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and its impact on global health have made the development of effective and safe vaccines crucial for this new lethal disease. So far, there are three main types of COVID-19 vaccines in use around the world: messenger RNA-based vaccines, adenoviral vector vaccines, and inactivated whole-virus vaccines. Some of them have passed through phase 3 of safety and efficacy trials and are widely used for prophylaxis of COVID-19 infection. A plethora of cutaneous adverse events have been reported, most of them mild or moderate injection-site reactions. Some rare delayed inflammatory reactions such as "COVID arm" have also been reported, posing questions on their pathophysiology and clinical importance. Some rare serious adverse events, such as vaccine-induced prothrombotic immune thrombocytopenia and anaphylaxis, have been described raising great concerns on the safety of some widely spread vaccines. More data need to be collected with further and more detailed analysis. The overall risk of such severe adverse reactions remains extremely low, and the benefits of the existing vaccines in combating the widespread threat of COVID-19 continue to outweigh the risk of their side effects.

The art of prevention: COVID-19 vaccine preparedness for the dermatologist

As COVID-19 vaccinations begin, dermatologists must be aware of the cutaneous adverse events reported in the clinical trials, including injection site and hypersensitivity reactions, and emerging evidence of dermal filler injection reactions after vaccination. The filler reaction may represent the development of a delayed-type hypersensitivity in the setting of another immunologic trigger (i.e., the vaccine). After conducting a literature review of similar reactions, their pathophysiology, and management, we present a set of timely clinical considerations for counseling, prevention, and management of possible cutaneous sequelae of the COVID-19 vaccine. We encourage documentation of vaccine-related reactions to aid the safety data collection in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System and the American Academy of Dermatology COVID-19 Registry.