Hyaluronic acid soft tissue filler delayed inflammatory reaction following COVID-19 vaccination - A case report

Delayed Inflammatory Reaction to Hyaluronic Acid Dermal Filler Following Zoledronic Acid Administration: A Case Report

Zoledronic acid is a bisphosphonate that can be administered intravenously and used to treat several bone disorders. It decreases bone resorption, thereby improving bone mineral density (BMD) and reducing fractures. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved zoledronic acid for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal females and males and for other conditions. Zoledronic acid is generally well tolerated, with most side effects being musculoskeletal or gastrointestinal. Cutaneous side effects include maculopapular rash and other mild skin reactions. Rare severe skin rashes, such as toxic epidermal necrolysis, have been reported. Here, we report the case of a 64-year-old female with a medical history of breast cancer status post-radical mastectomy and chemotherapy presenting with delayed hypersensitivity reaction to a hyaluronic acid dermal filler two days after receiving zoledronic acid intravenously given to maintain bone density, symptoms completely resolved with oral prednisolone 20 mg once daily and cetirizine 10 mg. Cases of delayed inflammatory reaction to hyaluronic acid soft tissue filler have previously been reported in patients who have received vaccination or those with viral infections. However, to our knowledge, there have been no reports of delayed inflammatory reactions to facial hyaluronic acid injections after zoledronic acid administration.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination or Infection on the Safety and Efficacy of Aesthetic Injections: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Aesthetic injections have become increasingly popular for maintaining a youthful appearance. However, with the rise of SARS-CoV-2, there have been concerns about potential complications. This study aims to summarize and understand the complications that occur in individuals who have received cosmetic injections after SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination. By doing so, we hope to provide recommendations to minimize these complications and ensure the safety of aesthetic treatments in the current COVID-19 era.

METHODS

The PRISMA guidelines, the Preferred Reporting Program for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, were used for this review. Databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, Web of Science and ScienceDirect were searched. The last search time of each database was May 10, 2023. In addition, relevant references were manually searched.

RESULTS

A total of 26 studies containing 139 patients were searched. The complication with the highest percentage of reported patients was delayed inflammatory response (DIR) (n = 68; 48.92%), followed by diminished efficacy (n = 45; 32.37%) and filler reaction (n = 12; 8.63%). The remaining complications include hypersensitivity reactions, symptomatic hypercalcemia, sub-acute hypersensitive reactions, hyperalgesia, infection, fat necrosis and granulomatous reaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Cosmetic injectable procedures are generally safe but may have adverse effects, particularly during the pandemic. It is important for individuals to fully understand these risks beforehand. Clinicians should be knowledgeable about adverse event mechanisms and management to prevent issues. Industry leaders should strengthen risk management efforts to ensure safe and steady development of cosmetic injections. Overall, a comprehensive understanding, effective communication and risk management are crucial for the safe use of cosmetic injectable procedures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors at www.springer.com/00266 .

Multicentric observational study of the possible side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine in relation to absorbable thread insertion

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination programs in Europe began in December 2020, and as the number of vaccinated people increased, more information emerged about the possible side effects of vaccines. Recently, some reports appeared around the association of adverse reactions following soft-tissue filler injections and the COVID-19 vaccines. This fact raised the concerns of esthetic practitioners regarding the possibility of the association of the COVID-19 vaccine and adverse effects in other esthetic treatments. Many of us wonder if botox injection, biostimulation, or other procedure could trigger the same or other adverse reactions after the COVID-19 vaccination. Many colleagues postpone esthetic treatments, canceling the appointments.

Objective

The objective of our investigation was to understand if any adverse reactions have been observed in the patients who underwent threads implantation before and after the vaccination.

Materials and Methods

Four medical centers have collected the data of the patients treated with absorbable threads before the vaccination and after vaccination for COVID-19. The dossiers of 190 patients with a mean age of 50.4 years were evaluated. Three questionnaires were administered 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months after thread implantation.

Results

There were no adverse reactions in the groups of patients under monitoring. Only one patient presented signs of inflammation and infection, but they are more probably attributable to the contamination during thread insertion.

Conclusions

No patients treated with absorbable threads developed adverse events in relation to the COVID-19 vaccine. The only case of inflammation is attributable probably to the contamination of the thread during the procedure.

Hyaluronidase for Dermal Filler Complications: Review of Applications and Dosage Recommendations

BACKGROUND

Hyaluronidase (Hyal) can reverse complications of hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers, which has contributed substantially to the popularity of such procedures. Still, there are differing opinions regarding Hyal treatment, including dosage recommendations in filler complication management.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to address unanswered questions regarding Hyal treatment for HA filler complications, including timing and dosage, skin pretesting, properties of various Hyals and interactions with HA gels, and pitfalls of the treatment.

METHODS

PubMed and Google Scholar databases were searched from inception for articles on Hyal therapy for filler complications. Articles were evaluated regarding their contribution to the field. The extensive literature review includes international leaders' suggestions and expert panels' recommendations.

RESULTS

There are limited controlled data but increasing clinical experience with Hyal treatment. The currently used Hyals provide good results and have an acceptable safety profile. Nonemergent complications such as the Tyndall effect, noninflamed nodules, and allergic or hypersensitivity reactions should be treated with low or moderate Hyal doses. Hyal should be considered with prior or simultaneous oral antibiotic treatment in managing inflammatory nodules. Hyal may be tried for granulomas that have not responded to intralesional steroids. Emergent complications such as vascular occlusion and blindness require immediate, high-dose Hyal treatment. Regarding blindness, the injection technique, retrobulbar versus supraorbital, remains controversial. Ultrasound guidance can increase the efficacy of the above interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Hyal is essential in aesthetic practice because it can safely treat most HA filler complications. Immediate Hyal treatment is required for emergent complications. Aesthetic practitioners should be versed in using Hyal and effective dosage protocols.

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.

Complications of fillers in the lips and perioral area: Prevention, assessment, and management focusing on ultrasound guidance

An ever-increasing interest in perioral rejuvenation with dermal fillers reflects the esthetic importance of this region. However, filler injections in the lips and perioral area have been associated with various complications. Such complications are classified according to severity (mild, moderate, severe) or by the time of onset: immediate (within 24 h after injection), early (24 h to 4 weeks post-procedure), and late or delayed (>4 weeks after injection). While most complications are mild and manageable, vascular compromise, infections, and the development of delayed-onset nodules may significantly undermine the ultimate esthetic outcome and cause substantial morbidity. These more serious complications often require more invasive treatment modalities. This article details the prevention and management of such adverse events and discusses safe filler injection principles, including safety recommendations for the lips. Lastly, we highlight the use of ultrasound guidance in complication prevention (vascular mapping, filler identification, location, and extent), assessment (identification of intravascular embolus or external vascular compression by the filler implant), and management (real-time imaging of hyaluronidase or other drug injection in the affected area). Esthetic practitioners should be versed in injection anatomy, and the prevention, recognition, and management of filler complications in the perioral area.

Delayed inflammatory reaction to hyaluronic acid lip filler after the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine: A case report

Hypersensitivity reactions can be a side effect to any vaccine, but they are usually rare. The COVID-19 vaccination may cause hypersensitivity, and several cases of delayed hypersensitivity (DH) to hyaluronic acid (HA) dermal filler have been documented. The current report presents a case of a 36-year-old female patient with DH to HA dermal filler after receiving the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Symptoms, including dryness, swelling, and a painless nodule, appeared after the first and second doses of the vaccine. The patient was treated with intralesional hyaluronidase and triamcinolone in the outpatient clinic. Although HA is relatively safe and routinely used in aesthetic medicine, DH reactions must be considered. Therefore, an appropriate patient history should be obtained, and physicians should provide counselling on the potential reactions to avoid these adverse effects.

Management of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine-induced cutaneous complications: A comprehensive literature review

Despite the numerous reports of cutaneous manifestations associated with vaccines for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the relationship between COVID-19 vaccines and cutaneous side effects remains unevaluated. In this review, we examine these manifestations and their management. Reported dermatoses included injection-site reaction (early and delayed), type I allergic reaction, morbilliform eruption, pityriasis rosea, Sweet syndrome, lichen planus, psoriasis, herpes zoster reactivation, erythema multiforme, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN). The most common COVID-19 vaccination-related cutaneous manifestations are delayed local reactions, approximately 66% of which are associated with the Moderna vaccine, and 33% with the Pfizer vaccine. Aside from mild injection-site reactions, severe reactions include anaphylaxis and TEN. Most reactions, except for Stevens-Johnson syndrome and anaphylaxis, though unpredictable and unpreventable are mild and can be treated symptomatically. Findings from this review should allow primary care physicians and dermatologists to reach faster diagnosis and initiate prompt intervention.

Side effects after hyaluronic acid facial injection in adults during COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Different causes may be responsible for delayed inflammatory reactions after hyaluronic acid injections, among them several mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2.

AIMS

The study's objective was to assess the percentage of adverse reactions after hyaluronic acid injections in a cohort of adult patients with a test for SARS-CoV-2 or vaccinated during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PATIENTS/METHODS

An observational, retrospective, comparative, multi-center, non-interventional in a real-life setting study was carried out with patients treated with facial injections of hyaluronic acid from May to September 2021, with a test to discard SARS-COV 2 or that had been vaccinated.

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients were included. Seven (11.1%) were vaccinated patients without a test for SaRS-CoV-2 and 56 (88.9%) with antigenic or PCR screening tests (18 [32.1%] negative and 39 [69.6%] positives for COVID-19). The mean age was 51.3 (SD 12.71; range 23-70), and 57 (90.5%) were female. Twenty-three patients (36.5%) had a history of adverse events with hyaluronic acid injections. During the study, 15 adverse events were reported; 11 patients (73.3%) had a history (p = 0.0018); two patients (13.3%) had been vaccinated; 13 (86.7%) had performed a SARS-CoV2 test (six [46.2%] negatives, and seven [53.8%] with a positive result; p = 0.5969). All adverse study events were resolved, and none had sequelae.

CONCLUSION

Adverse events after hyaluronic acid facial injections were higher among patients with a history but not among those diagnosed with COVID-19. The new scenario related to COVID-19 infections or vaccinations would require readapting criteria for applying hyaluronic acid injections.

Biopharmaceutical applications of microbial polysaccharides as materials: A review

Biological characteristics of natural polymers make microbial polysaccharides an excellent choice for biopharmaceuticals. Due to its easy purifying procedure and high production efficiency, it is capable of resolving the existing application issues associated with some plant and animal polysaccharides. Furthermore, microbial polysaccharides are recognized as prospective substitutes for these polysaccharides based on the search for eco-friendly chemicals. In this review, the microstructure and properties of microbial polysaccharides are utilized to highlight their characteristics and potential medical applications. From the standpoint of pathogenic processes, in-depth explanations are provided on the effects of microbial polysaccharides as active ingredients in the treatment of human diseases, anti-aging, and drug delivery. In addition, the scholarly developments and commercial applications of microbial polysaccharides as medical raw materials are also discussed. The conclusion is that understanding the use of microbial polysaccharides in biopharmaceuticals is essential for the future development of pharmacology and therapeutic medicine.

Delayed Inflammatory Reactions After Hyaluronic Acid Filling of Neck Lines: A Case Report

The incidence of adverse events after hyaluronic acid filling is gradually increasing. In addition to acute reactions in the early postoperative period, there have been some cases of delayed inflammatory reactions. However, such events are rarely reported in Asia, which may be due to atypical symptoms, long intervals, and misidentification of the product quality. Herein, we present a case in which erythema of the neck appeared three weeks after hyaluronic acid injection into the neck lines and a delayed inflammatory reaction was diagnosed. Watchful waiting was performed, and the erythema subsided spontaneously after two weeks. This case suggests that in patients with a history of hyaluronic acid injections who develop allergic and inflammatory reactions after an interval, it is important to consider whether the reaction is a delayed inflammatory reaction, and if aggressive intervention is necessary.

Late Hypersensitivity Reactions to the BNT162b2 SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Are Linked to Delayed Skin Sensitization and Prior Exposure to Hyaluronic Acid

Background: Late hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to the BNT162b2-vaccine have raised concerns regarding its safety, particularly as further immunizations are required. The yield of skin testing with the BNT162b2v is unclear, as well as the risk factors and outcomes of re-immunization after late HSRs. Objective: We studied a series of patients with late HSRs to BNT162b2v. Methods: Patients referred to the Sheba medical center from December 2020 to May 2021 with late HSRs to the first dose of BNT162b2 were included. HSRs were defined as late if they appeared or lasted >24 h after inoculation. We compared late HSRs to immediate HSRs that appeared within minutes−2 h after vaccination. Intradermal testing with PEG-containing medication and BNT162b2v was performed. Results: A total of 17 patients that presented with late HSRs (study group) were compared to 34 patients with immediate HSRs (control group). Delayed sensitivity to intradermal testing of the BNT162b2v was observed in 9/17 (53%) of the study group compared to 4/34 (12%) in the control group (p = 0.01). Former exposure to a dermal filler with hyaluronic acid was documented among 7/17 (41%) vs. 2/34 (6%) in the study and control groups, respectively, (p = 0.0038). All patients who presented with late HSRs were advised to receive subsequent doses of the BNT162b2v vaccine with or without concomitant medication, and all were re-immunized successfully. Conclusions: Late HSRs to BNT162b2v were linked with positive responses to intradermal testing with the vaccine and prior exposure to derma fillers with hyaluronic acid. This may elude to an immune mechanism triggered by former exposures. Although further studies are needed, late HSRs to the BNT162b2-vaccine did not prevent patients from receiving subsequent doses of the vaccines.

Delayed infectious reactions of dermal filler injections in the face: Causes and management

OBJECTIVE

Nowadays, dermal filler injections in the face, are widespread. However, late complications are rarely reported and misunderstood. Moreover, they could be potentially severe, particularly cellulitis which is life-threatening. Reactivation of the biofilm and the hypersensitivity reaction are the main etiopathogenic factors of such unpredictable infections and granuloma reactions. Through four cases of foreign-body cellulitis, this article aims to explain the causality of filler material, and trigger conditions while emphasizes the prompt and adequate solution.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This work is a retrospective study and chart review which was granted an exemption by the author's institutional review board (IRB). Four women ranging from 27 to 55 years old, presented with onset symptoms of cellulitis of the face and inflammatory swelling of the lip. The hyaluronic acid filler was injected a long date prior. Trigger conditions caused the hatching of such complications which were solved with medical treatment without any filler dissolution or removal.

RESULTS

Improvement of the symptoms was remarkable within the three and fifth days of antibiotic therapy. There was no abscess formation or, recurrence for more than one-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The screening for dermal filler deposits must be considered for any inflammatory reaction of the face. Their causality should be discussed as well as the infectious and/or immunologic etiology, ensuring prompt and adequate medical treatment. Thus abscess formation could then not happen, and the resolution of the inflammatory reaction will be obtained. The extraction of filler material or the use of hyaluronidase should not be mandatory and will be done on a case-by-case basis.

Global prevalence and clinical manifestations of cutaneous adverse reactions following COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Although vaccination is widely accepted as an effective method of preventing and controlling the COVID-19 pandemic, many people are concerned about possible cutaneous side-effects, which can delay or prevent them from being vaccinated. The objectives of this systematic review were to assess the global prevalence and clinical manifestations of cutaneous adverse reactions following COVID-19 vaccination. PubMed and Scopus databases were searched for articles published from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2021, and reference lists for each selected article were screened. Case reports, case series, observational studies and randomized controlled trials that provided information on cutaneous adverse reactions following COVID-19 vaccines were included. A total of 300 studies were included in a systematic review of which 32 studies with 946 366 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of cutaneous manifestations following COVID-19 vaccination was 3.8% (95% CI, 2.7%-5.3%). COVID-19 vaccines based on the mRNA platform had a higher prevalence than other platforms at 6.9% (95% CI, 3.8%-12.3%). Various cutaneous manifestations have been reported from injection site reactions, which were the most common (72.16%) to uncommon adverse reactions such as delayed inflammatory reactions to tissue filler (0.07%) and flares of pre-existing dermatoses (0.07%). Severe cutaneous reactions such as anaphylaxis have also been reported, but in rare cases (0.05%). In conclusion, cutaneous adverse reactions are common, especially in those receiving mRNA vaccines. Most reactions are mild and are not contraindications to subsequent vaccination except for anaphylaxis, which rarely occurs. COVID-19 vaccination may also be associated with flares of pre-existing dermatoses and delayed inflammatory reactions to tissue filler. Patients with a history of allergies, pre-existing skin conditions or scheduled for filler injections should receive additional precounselling and monitoring. A better understanding of potential side-effects may strengthen public confidence in those wary of new vaccine technologies.

Do we miss rare adverse events induced by COVID-19 vaccination?

Although severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has caused many complications, the invention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines has also brought about several adverse events, from common side effects to unexpected and rare ones. Common vaccine-related adverse reactions manifest locally or systematically following any vaccine, including COVID-19 vaccines. Specific side effects, known as adverse events of particular interest (AESI), are unusual and need more evaluation. Here, we discuss some of the most critical rare adverse events of COVID-19 vaccines.

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.

The COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on esthetic dermatology

In general, the world population interest has increased for maintaining youthfulness and having better appearance since this leads to a better mental wellbeing and self-estimate. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has revolutionized every field of medicine. As every specialty has been affected by limitations caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), this branch of medicine has also needed certain precautions for safer practice in the COVID era. With the global vaccination program against COVID-19, reports of some cutaneous reactions in patients have been undergone various esthetic procedures including filler or botox injection would be increasingly demonstrated. Although the end of pandemic was announced, the necessity of continuing COVID vaccination in future mandates gathering data regarding safety of vaccines. Herein, we presented a comprehensive review on various aspects of association between esthetic medicine or cosmetic dermatology and COVID-19.

Delayed inflammatory response evoked in nasal alloplastic implants after COVID-19 vaccination: A case report

BACKGROUND

Delayed inflammatory reactions (DIRs) in alloplast rhinoplasty are a rare complication that may occur several months to years after surgery. The exact causes and mechanisms are unclear, but several triggering factors, including infections, trauma, dental procedures, and vaccination, have been reported.

CASE SUMMARY

A 39-year-old male patient who had undergone augmentation rhinoplasty 8 years ago had DIRs after the administration of the first dose of the mRNA Pfizer coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine. He suddenly had tender, erythematous swelling on his face 6 d after vaccination. As there was no improvement in the patient’s condition after the conservative treatment, surgical removal of an alloplastic nasal implant was performed. Immediately after the surgery, the DIRs and accompanying symptoms ameliorated rapidly. A histological study conducted during surgery was fibrosis and small fragments of the hyaline cartilage.

CONCLUSION

The correlation between DIRs and COVID-19 vaccination has not been reported yet and the exact mechanism is unclear. Because the uncontrolled inflammatory reactions on the nose leave serious sequelae, surgeons should be conscious of the correlation between COVID-19 vaccines and DIRs associated with nasal alloplastic implants. And further histological or microbiological studies should be performed to determine the cause of DIRs.

[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.

An anaphylactic reaction after simultaneous injection of hyaluronic acid fillers and human collagen

Anaphylaxis is rare following the injection of hyaluronic acid fillers or human collagen for esthetic improvement of the face. We report a case occurring in a 63-year-old woman treated simultaneously with both. Symptoms included full-body urticaria and gastrointestinal symptoms that declined within a few hours, facial redness and swelling lasting a few days, and a nodule in the right tear trough that recurred over several months. Treatment with corticosteroids and antihistamine ultimately supported a complete recovery. Although rare, practitioners using injectables should be trained to manage anaphylactic events if they occur.

Association between BNT162b2 vaccination and the development of delayed inflammatory reactions to hyaluronic acid-based dermal fillers - A nationwide survey

Background

Delayed inflammatory reactions (DIRs) to hyaluronic acid (HA)‐based dermal fillers following COVID‐19 vaccination has been reported in a few anecdotal reports and small series of cases.

Aim

To evaluate the clinical characteristics, incidence and management options relevant to BNT162b2 vaccination‐associated DIR – A nationwide survey was conducted.

Methods

An online self‐administered survey was sent to physicians who actively practice tissue filler injections. The data acquired included demographic and clinical characteristics of relevant DIR cases.

Results

Out of 262 responders, 20 cases with DIR following the vaccination were reported. 35% and 65% occurred shortly after the first and second vaccination dose, respectively. Overall, 65% of the DIRs appeared ≤5 days after vaccine administration and most DIRs resolved within 21 days. The filler's volume (P = .016) was associated with higher DIR severity, and the same tendency was noted among some filler types and locations of injection. Medical intervention was provided in 12 (60%) cases.

Conclusion

DIR associated with BNT162b2 vaccination is rare and tends to resolve spontaneously or with short‐term medical intervention.

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.

Midface Infection after COVID-19 Vaccination in a Patient with Calcium Hydroxylapatite Dermal Filler: A Case Report and Literature Review

The emergence of vaccines for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) raises risk of possible adverse events from interaction between the vaccines and facial aesthetic care. A 47-year-old female with no medical comorbidities visited our emergency room due to midface painful swelling after 3 hours following receiving the second dose of the messenger RNA BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine. About 14 years ago, she underwent nonsurgical augmentation on the nasojugal groove with a calcium hydroxylapatite dermal filler. We performed incision and drainage under general anesthesia on the next day. During operation, yellowish pus-like materials bulged out. After an operation, we performed a combination therapy with antibiotics and methylprednisolone. Her symptoms improved day by day after surgery, and then a complete recovery was achieved at 3 weeks after the treatment. In conclusion, providers of aesthetic procedures are to be aware of the potential risks of such vaccines for patients who already had or seek to receive dermal filler injections.

Delayed hypersensitivity reaction from microneedling twenty years after silicone fillers

Skin rejuvenation procedures have increasingly flooded the aesthetic market, one of which includes microneedling. In microneedling, multiple fine punctures of the skin are performed with a needle to induce neocollagenesis. Microneedling has increasingly been used to treat inflammatory acne, acne scarring, photodamaged skin, and even radiation dermatitis. We present a patient with a stable history of liquid injectable silicone (LIS) given 20 years prior who developed chronic periocular and facial hypersensitivity after undergoing microneedling at a medi-spa. Long-term steroids and immunosuppressants were needed for control. The patient's severe reaction and resistance to treatment highlights the potential complications of microneedling administered by a non-medical professional in the setting of prior injectable silicone.

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.

Incidence and Treatment of Delayed-onset Nodules After VYC Filler Injections to 2139 Patients at a Single Canadian Clinic

Background

Data suggest that hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers using VYC technology have a higher incidence of delayed‐onset nodule development at facial injection sites than earlier HA products.

Objective

To assess the incidence of delayed‐onset nodules with VYC products based on a single experienced injector.

Methods and Materials

Patients with delayed‐onset nodules after injections with VYC‐20L, VYC‐17.5L, and VYC‐15L were identified by retrospective chart review.

Results

Since 2010, 2139 patients received injections from the same physician with combinations of VYC‐20L (57.6% of patients; 2.4 syringes/patient), VYC‐17.5L (23.9%; 1.5), or VYC‐15L (18.5%; 1.5). Seven female patients (mean age, 62 years) developed delayed‐onset nodules for an overall incidence of 0.33%. A potential inflammatory trigger (reported by 6 patients) occurred 1–168 days prior to nodule development. Nodule biopsy in 1 patient confirmed a foreign‐body granuloma. The most effective treatment incorporated prednisone with or without hyaluronidase, and in 2 patients, nodules resolved spontaneously. The incidence of delayed‐onset nodules was not associated with injection technique or amount of product used.

Conclusion

VYC‐associated incidence of delayed‐onset nodules (0.33%) was lower than earlier estimates from previous studies. In the current analysis, VYC‐15L had a rate of delayed reactions comparable with non‐VYC products.

Hyaluronic acid delayed inflammatory reaction after third dose of SARS CoV-2 vaccine

Background

Treatments based on hyaluronic acid represent one of the most largely used practice of esthetic medicine. In the literature, it has already been described delayed reaction after vaccine like flu vaccine mediated by T‐lymphocytes.

Aim

We report three cases of dermal filler reactions following mRNA vaccination against SARS‐CoV‐2; all the patients had received the filler months or even years before the vaccine.

Patients

Patient one: A 60‐year–old female patient that was treated one year ago in the lip developed swelling days after getting mRNA Pfizer Biotech vaccine. She received her booster of Pfizer vaccination one week before. Patient two: A 45‐year–old female patient treated in the lip two years before developed angioedema days after getting her booster of Pfizer Biotech vaccine. In this case, it was necessary to prescribe cortisone per os. Patient three: A 40‐year‐old female patient treated for the nasolabial fold five months before developed erythema and edema after receiving the booster of Moderna Vaccine.

Results

As demonstrated in our three case reports, even the booster of vaccine can cause delayed inflammatory reactions in patients that have previously received fillers.

Conclusion

Delayed inflammatory reactions in patients that have received filler in the past are uncommon and usually self‐limited. Those are the first example reported in the literature of reaction after the booster dose without any previous symptoms.

Painful subacute thyroiditis occurring after the administration of influenza vaccine and hyaluronic acid dermal filler: A case report

RATIONALE

The occurrence of subacute thyroiditis (SAT) after vaccines or after hyaluronic acid skin fillers is very rare and might be related to genetic susceptibility. We suggest that the co-administration of both products could potentially increase the possibility of development of SAT.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 58-year-old Caucasian healthy female initially presented with chills, myalgia, dysphagia, sore throat, dry cough, fatigue, and intermittent fever of 38.5°C orally after simultaneous injection of an influenza vaccine and a dermal filler containing hyaluronic acid. Ten days later the patient developed palpitations and neck pain radiating to the left jaw.

DIAGNOSIS AND INTERVENTIONS

She was diagnosed with SAT on day 16 after her first visit and responded promptly to etoricoxib treatment.

OUTCOMES

The patient progressed clinically from hyperthyroidism to euthyroid state and eventually to hypothyroidism and further testing showed she had HLA B-35 haplotype.

LESSONS

Physicians should be aware that SAT might be associated with the administration an influenza vaccine and this possible association might increase if the vaccine was co-administered with a dermal filler.

Cutaneous Complications of mRNA and AZD1222 COVID-19 Vaccines: A Worldwide Review

Because of the increasing emergence of cutaneous reactions from COVID-19 vaccines worldwide, we investigated the published reports of these complications. We searched the PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus databases and the preprint server bioRxiv for articles on cutaneous complications linked to mRNA-1273 (Moderna), BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech), and AZD1222 (AstraZeneca–Oxford University) vaccines published until 30 September 2021. Eighty studies describing a total of 1415 reactions were included. Cutaneous reactions were more prevalent in females (81.6%). Delayed large local reactions were the most common complication (40.4%), followed by local injection site reactions (16.5%), zoster (9.5%), and urticarial eruptions (9.0%). Injection site and delayed large local reactions were predominantly caused by the mRNA-1273 vaccine (79.5% and 72.0%, respectively). BNT162b2 vaccination was more closely linked to distant reactions (50.1%) than mRNA-1273 (30.0%). Zoster was the most common distant reaction. Of reactions with adequate information for both vaccine doses, 58.3% occurred after the first dose only, 26.9% after the second dose only, and 14.8% after both doses. Overall, a large spectrum of cutaneous reaction patterns occurred following the COVID-19 vaccination. Most were mild and without long-term health implications. Therefore, the occurrence of such dermatologic complications does not contraindicate subsequent vaccination.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-related cutaneous manifestations: a systematic review

To date, over 250 million people have been reportedly infected by COVID‐19 disease, which has spread across the globe and led to approximately 5.1 million fatalities. To prevent both COVID‐19 and viral transmission, DNA‐based/RNA‐based vaccines, non‐replicating viral vector vaccines, and inactivated vaccines have been recently developed. However, a precise clinical and histological characterization of SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccine‐related dermatological manifestations is still lacking. A systematic review of 229 articles was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, in order to provide an extensive overview of SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccine‐related skin manifestations. Data on demographics, number of reported cases with cutaneous involvement, vaccine, and rash type (morphology) were extracted from articles and summarized. A total of 5941 SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccine‐related dermatological manifestations were gathered. Local injection‐site reactions were the most frequently observed, followed by rash/unspecified cutaneous eruption, urticarial rashes, angioedema, herpes zoster, morbilliform/maculopapular/erythematous macular eruption, pityriasis rosea and pityriasis rosea‐like eruptions, and other less common dermatological manifestations. Flares of pre‐existing dermatological conditions were also reported. Cutaneous adverse reactions following SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccine administration seem to be heterogeneous, rather infrequent, and not life‐threatening. Vaccinated patients should be monitored for skin manifestations, and dermatological evaluation should be offered, when needed.

Cutaneous Reactions to COVID-19 Vaccines: A Review

Background

The increasing number of reports on cutaneous reactions following COVID-19 vaccination has led to growing concerns among certain groups.

Objective

We reviewed the published reports of cutaneous lesions after COVID-19 vaccination.

Methods

We conducted a literature search for original and review articles published between January 1, 2020, and September 27, 2021.

Results

Eleven cutaneous reactions associated with COVID-19 vaccines were determined; the most prevalent reactions were local injection site reactions, delayed local reactions, urticaria, angioedema, and morbilliform eruptions. There were more reports on skin reactions following the administration of messenger RNA-based vaccines than on those following the administration of adenoviral vector or inactivated whole-virus vaccines, in part, due to their higher administration rate. Most reported skin reactions occurred after the first vaccine dose.

Limitations

A reporting bias could not be excluded, and skin biopsy results were not available for most included individuals. Moreover, given that the included trials focused on vaccine efficacy, there was a lack of details concerning cutaneous reactions and participant information.

Conclusion

Not all cutaneous reactions observed after COVID-19 vaccination are hypersensitivity reactions. Different cutaneous reactions may reflect underlying immune responses to the vaccines. A large majority of COVID-19 vaccination reactions were mild and self-limiting, and people should be encouraged to complete their vaccination regimen.

First reported case of delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction to non-hyaluronic acid Polycaprolactone dermal filler following COVID-19 vaccination: A case report and a review of the literature

Cases of filler reactions after COVID‐19 vaccination have been reported. Here, we present the first case of delayed‐type reaction (DTR) to non‐hyaluronic acid Polycaprolactone dermal filler after the second dose of Sinopharm COVID‐19 vaccine which was improved with administration of topical and intralesional steroids.

Thyroid eye disease reactivation associated with COVID-19 vaccination

To describe the presentation of both new-onset and reactivation of thyroid eye disease (TED) following COVID-19 vaccination. Single-institution retrospective case series of patients presenting with symptoms and signs of new or reactivated TED coinciding with recent COVID-19 vaccination. Data collected included patient age, gender, presenting symptoms, ocular history, clinical signs, and interval duration between vaccination and onset of ocular symptoms. Three female patients were identified. All patients were over 18 years of age (range 45–66 years). Patients received either the Moderna or Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine and presented with symptoms of TED within 24 h to 21 days of receiving their first or second dose. None of the patients had previous infections with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Two patients had a history of inactive TED with stable thyroid function tests: One of these patients had stable disease for at least 15 years and the other had stable disease for 5 years. The third patient had no previous history of thyroid dysfunction or TED and presented with low levels of thyroid-stimulating hormone. All three cases presented with proptosis. In two of three cases, periorbital edema, eyelid retraction, and diplopia were present. None were current smokers. One had prior facial hyaluronic acid filler injections. Symptoms in all cases were improving at 4 to 8 months. While the possibility of unrelated TED flaring concurrently with COVID-19 vaccination exists, questions remain on the effects of the COVID-19 vaccine in patients with autoimmune ophthalmic diseases. Physicians should be aware of this potential association and counsel patients appropriately.

Sub-acute hypersensitive reaction to botulinum toxin type A following Covid-19 vaccination: Case report and literature review

RATIONALE

Botulinum toxin type A (BTA) is one of the most widely used injectable agents in cosmetic surgery. Corona virus disease 2019 (Covid-19) infection and vaccination, which can induce specific and nonspecific activation of the immune system, has been reported to induce delayed inflammatory reactions to previously injected hyaluronic acid fillers. However, there are no reports about the interaction between BTA and Covid-19. We aimed to report 2 sub-acute cases of allergic reactions to BTA in facial cosmesis following the Covid-19 vaccination.

PATIENT CONCERN

A 35-year-old and a 34-year-old female who has several previous BTA injections without any adverse effects experienced facial swelling, flu-like symptoms after BTA treatment following the Covid-19 vaccination.

DIAGNOSE

According to the typical clinical manifestation, a hypersensitive reaction to BTA was considered.

INTERVENTION

Corticosteroids and antihistamine were administered empirically.

OUTCOMES

The flu-like symptoms recovered over the next day, but the facial swelling gradually faded within 1 to 2 weeks.

LESSONS

A literature review was also conducted to summarize the hypersensitive actions to cosmesis related to Covid-19. We recommend BTA injection be administered at least 2 to 3 months after Covid-19 vaccination.

Adverse Events Following COVID-19 Vaccine in Patients Previously Injected with Facial Filler: Scoping Review and Case Report

The “Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee 17 December 2020 Meeting Briefing Document”, formulated by the FDA, reported three cases of swelling in areas previously injected with HA filler, introducing the possible relationship between a COVID-19 vaccine and adverse events in areas previously injected with HA fillers. The aim of this research is to report a case of an adverse event following a COVID-19 vaccine in a patient previously injected with facial filler. Furthermore, a scoping review on the same topic was performed. The research was carried out on the electronic databases PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar and Scopus. The selection process identified four articles as eligible for inclusion in the review. Nineteen patients, including the described case report, who experienced an adverse event following a COVID-19 vaccine in areas previously injected with facial filler were identified. Adverse events following a COVID-19 vaccine in patients previously injected with facial filler appear to be rare. A high BDDE cross-linking rate and/or a low-molecular-weight hyaluronic acid filler may have a higher tardive adverse event rate when triggered.

Cutaneous and Allergic reactions due to COVID-19 vaccinations: A review

Introduction

The pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) has had an unprecedented impact on the overall health and the global economy. Vaccination is currently the most dependable strategy to end the pandemic, despite the slower‐than‐hoped‐for rollout, particularly for low‐to‐middle‐income countries, and the uncertain duration of protection afforded by vaccination. The spike protein of the virus (immunodominant antigen of the virus) is the main target of the approved and candidate SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccines. This protein binds to the ACE2 receptor of the host cell, initiating the entry of the virus into the cell and the chain of subsequent events ending to Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. The safety profile of these vaccines needs is closely assessed.

Methods

This comprehensive review includes searching the PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases using the keywords “coronavirus”, “COVID‐19”, “vaccine”, “cutaneous reactions”, “allergic reactions”, and “SARS‐CoV‐2”. Manual searching of reference lists of included articles augmented the research. The research was updated in June 2021.

Results

In this narrative review, we tried to investigate and discuss the cutaneous and allergic reactions related to SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccines currently available in the literature. As a result, although COVID‐19 vaccines can be reported to develop allergic and anaphylactic reactions, especially after m‐RNA vaccines, they remain at a low rate, and it is observed that these reactions may develop more frequently, especially in patients with previous allergies and mast cell disorders. Fortunately, these reactions are generally transient, benign, self‐limited.

Conclusion

Although there is still no definitive evidence, as dermatologists, we must be aware of the possibility of cutaneous reactions, newly diagnosed dermatoses, or exacerbation of existing dermatoses that may develop after the COVID‐19 vaccinations.

Cutaneous Adverse Reactions Associated with SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines

Many patients are receiving SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations, which have been associated with a variety of adverse effects. Cutaneous adverse reactions to SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations have been progressively reported, but they have not been reviewed according to their morphological clinical patterns. The objective of this review was to summarize the existing data concerning the cutaneous adverse reactions following SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and group them according to common morphological and pathogenetic patterns. We reviewed the English language literature up to 15 August 2021, using predefined keywords to identify the relevant studies evaluating cutaneous adverse reactions associated with SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. We search for recurrent morphological patterns sharing clinical signs and symptoms and physio-pathological mechanisms. Timing to onset following the first or booster dose of the vaccine, predisposing conditions, therapeutic management, and outcome were also collected. Among the dermatological manifestations associated with SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations, we distinguished: (1) new onset reactions and (2) flares of preexisting dermatoses. The most common were injection site reactions, affecting 30–70% and generally mild or moderate. Small case series or single case reports included filler reactions, exanthemas, vascular lesions, urticaria, eczematous dermatitis, autoimmune bullous reactions, and severe cutaneous adverse reactions. In addition, the exacerbation of chronic immuno-mediated dermatoses (mainly psoriasis and atopic dermatitis) and reactivations of herpes infection were reported. The cutaneous reactions were generally mild, self-limiting, and resembled common cutaneous drug eruptions and/or COVID-19 skin manifestations.