Comparison of 2.5% agarose gel vs hyaluronic acid filler, for the correction of moderate to severe nasolabial folds

Background

Agarose gel filler is a natural hydrocolloid with a three‐dimensional structure similar to the extracellular matrix, with gel formed by hydrogen bonds and electrostatic interactions rather than through chemical cross‐linking or polymerization.

Objective

To determine efficacy and safety of 2.5% agarose gel filler for the correction of nasolabial folds.

Methods

In this split‐face study, efficacy, safety, and usability of 2.5% agarose gel were compared to those of NASHA‐L. Assessments included the nasolabial fold (NLF) Wrinkle Severity Rating Scale (WSRS), Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS [blinded investigator]), subject satisfaction, safety (adverse events), and usability.

Results

Sixty‐six subjects were treated, and 46/66 (66.7%) were available for evaluation at 3 months, when mean change in WSRS was identical for both products (−1.1 ± 0.4 for 2.5% agarose; −1.1 ± 0.4 for NASHA‐L). Scores for each product remained similar across all time points and began to return to baseline between 7 and 8 months. GAIS score followed a similar pattern, rising between months 7 and 8 (2.7 ± 0.6 for 2.5% agarose at month 7‐3.3 ± 0.5 at month 8 and 2.7 ± 0.6 for NASHA‐L at month 7‐3.3 ± 0.5 at month 8). Ultrasound confirmed the longevity of both fillers between 7 and 8 months. All adverse events were transient in nature and resolved within 15 days. Most events were mild in nature, and the number of events was similar between the two fillers.

Conclusion

Treatment with 2.5% agarose gel resulted in improvement that persisted for between 7 and 8 months. The treatment effect was equivalent to NASHA‐L.

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

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

Vision Loss Associated with Hyaluronic Acid Fillers: A Systematic Review of Literature

BACKGROUND

With the global increase in the use of injectable fillers, more cases with serious adverse events such as skin ischemia and vision loss are being reported. This article aims to review the role of HA fillers, as a subgroup separate from fat graft and non-HA fillers, in causing vision loss and to elucidate various features and outcomes of post-HA filler vision loss.

METHODS

The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to report this review. A total of 29 articles presenting 60 unique cases of post-HA filler vision loss were identified in the literature. Based on various inclusion and exclusion criteria, 26 articles with details of 44 cases were included in this study.

RESULTS

The majority of cases were seen in women and in the 20-40 years age group. The maximum number of cases was reported from Korea, followed by China. Nearly half of the cases reported after HA filler-related visual complications had partial loss of sight, hence 'partial vision loss' and 'complete vision loss' were used as differentiating descriptive terms to the degree of 'blindness.' Nearly all the cases were unilateral, with immediate onset of visual signs and symptoms. The nose, glabella, and forehead were the most commonly implicated areas, while no cases of post-HA filler vision loss were reported from lower face anatomical areas, including the chin, jawline, and lips. Partial vision loss after HA filler has a better prognosis than complete vision loss. HA filler volumes as low as 0.2 ml can cause permanent, complete vision loss, which is suggestive of the embolic nature of HA filler blockage. Ophthalmic artery occlusion (OAO) and central retinal artery occlusion (CRAO) were the two most commonly involved arterial obstruction patterns followed by branch retinal artery occlusion (BRAO). BRAO is the most favorable involved arterial pattern for a chance of recovery after HA filler-related vision loss while CRAO and OAO patterns carry a very poor prognosis.

CONCLUSION

Post-HA filler vision loss is nearly always of immediate onset. Partial vision loss after HA filler injection with the involvement of smaller branches of the retina, other than central retinal artery or ophthalmic artery, has more favorable visual outcomes.

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 www.springer.com/00266.

Management of noninflammatory nodule in chin after a large volume bolus injection of hyaluronic acid filler

As most Asian women desire to have an "inverted triangle" appearance for face, there is an increasing trend to give a large volume bolus (LVB) injection in the submental region of the chin for its lengthening. Hyaluronic acid (HA) dermal fillers are very popular for facial contouring and reshaping, including the chin area. Filler injection in the submental area has been a popular method to lengthen the chin. Placing an LVB of HA filler material at one place can present as the formation of lump or nodule after injection. We present a case of formation of a nodule in the submental area after injection of a single LVB of filler. The nodule was injected with hyaluronidase 3 months after its formation, and a near-complete resolution was seen immediately. Complete disappearance of the nodule was found at follow-up after 10 days. LVB of HA filler can give rise to the formation of noninflammatory nodules after filler injection in the immediate post-injection period. Knowledge of the type of filler material and presenting features can help in instituting the correct line of treatment for the resolution of signs and symptoms. Also 0.5 mL of filler can be recommended as maximum size of single LVB, based on the mathematical calculations.

The Hyaluronic Acid Fillers: Current Understanding of the Tissue Device Interface

The article is a detailed update regarding cosmetic injectable fillers, specifically focusing on hyaluronic acid fillers. Hyaluronic acid-injectable fillers are used extensively for soft tissue volumizing and contouring. Many different hyaluronic acid-injectable fillers are available on the market and differ in terms of hyaluronic acid concentration, particle size, cross-linking density, requisite needle size, duration, stiffness, hydration, presence of lidocaine, type of cross-linking technology, and cost. Hyaluronic acid is a natural component of many soft tissues, is identical across species minimizing immunogenicity has been linked to wound healing and skin regeneration, and is currently actively being studied for tissue engineering purposes. The biomechanical and biochemical effects of HA on the local microenvironment of the injected site are key to its success as a soft tissue filler. Knowledge of the tissue-device interface will help guide the facial practitioner and lead to optimal outcomes for patients.