Anti‐aging and hydration efficacy of a cross‐linked hyaluronic acid microstructure patch

This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of biodegradable microstructure patches composed of cross‐linked hyaluronic acid (CLHA). A primary skin irritation test showed that the CLHA patches were not an irritant, whereas a clinical study showed that application of single CLHA patches significantly improved skin hydration at the periorbital region for 3 days and at the nasolabial fold for 6 days. Patch application also improved superficial wrinkles at the periorbital region for 3 days and at the nasolabial fold for 1 day. The absence of side effects indicated that application of these CLHA microstructure patches is both safe and convenient for moisturization and anti‐wrinkle effects.     

Instrumental,clinical and subjective evaluation of the efficacy of a cosmetic treatment for home use

Background: In the last few years, there has been increasing demand for aesthetic procedures to improve the effects of skin aging.

Aim: To evaluate the anti-aging efficacy, tolerability and skin changes induced by the topical products containing hyaluronic acid, N-acetyl glucosamine and gamma-amino butyric acid through instrumental techniques, clinical and subjective evaluation.

Patients/Method: Twenty female enrolled applied a day and night cream after applying a serum, once week applied a mask, for 2 months. A clinical assessment of smoothness, expression wrinkles, fine wrinkles and measurements of the parameters using Reveal Imager, X-Rite, Corneometer, Dermalab, Moisture Meter EpiD were taken at day 0, 15, 30 and 60 of study period. A final assessment questionnaire was submitted.

Results: The products were accepted by all the volunteers. The hydration (Corneometer: T0 49.17 vs T60 61.11, average variation 24.28%) (Moisture Meter EpiD: T0 45.73 vs T60 61.10, average variation 33.60%), elasticity (Dermalab: T0 56.06 vs T60 62.78, average variation 11.98%) and lightening of the skin (X-Rite: T0 60.23 vs T60 63.36, average variation 5.26%) improved. All changes were statistically significant (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: The efficacy of the topical products is confirmed by subjective, clinical and instrumental assessment. This should be a routine approach in dermatologic practice.     

Comparative clinical study for the efficacy and safety of two different hyaluronic acid-based fillers with Tri-Hyal versus Vycross technology: A long-term prospective randomized clinical trial

Background

Hyaluronic acid-based fillers have an immediate volumizing effect for the treatment of dermal contour deformities and to smooth dermal depressions formed by the loss of volume. A previous study on 2016–2018 has shown the efficacy and safety of the HA-based filler ART FILLER® Volume on the midface only, but not in a comparative manner.

Methods

In this context, an 18 months prospective randomized single-blind study of the non-inferiority of ART FILLER® Volume versus the reference product Juvéderm Voluma® was performed on the midface, temple, and jawline, and non-comparative study on the chin. The efficacy and the longevity were evaluated for the selected face areas via dedicated clinical scoring systems after a single filler injection without any re-touch or re-injection. The short- and long-term adverse effects were also recorded.

Results

The observations confirmed the non-inferiority of ART FILLER® Volume versus the reference product on the different injected areas. For both fillers, the beneficial effects on volumes restoration were maintained 18 months post-injection; however, these effects were diminished among the time. Furthermore, injections of Art Filler® Volume were well tolerated by the subjects and showed less acute side effects compared with the reference product that may be explained by a lower induction of inflammation.     

Comparative split‐face study of durational changes in hyaluronic acid fillers for mid‐face volume augmentation

Subsequent changes after injection should be considered when determining the precise volume of injected dermal filler. Several studies have used scoring systems to evaluate facial volumes; however, these scoring systems are not particularly objective. This present study aimed to evaluate the volumetric changes over time on three‐dimensional (3D) images and the maintenance potential of various hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers used for mid‐face volume augmentation. This split‐face clinical study included nine Korean subjects who each received a mid‐facial injection of the test filler (B) on one side and a random control filler (J, R, or Y) on the contralateral side. Global, photographic, and 3D scanning assessments were conducted at baseline and after 30 min, 3 days, and 2, 4, 12, and 24 weeks. In all nine cases, the 3D images revealed the largest differences in height where the test filler (B) was injected. The results of subjective scoring systems correlated with the results of 3D imaging. The volumes of monophasic fillers (B and J) were maintained for longer periods of time than those of biphasic fillers (R and Y). The B filler yielded excellent volumizing and spreading effects and good injectability. This filler would be suitable for injection into high‐pressure areas, such as the lateral cheek, chin, and nasolabial fold. Moreover, the 3D imaging analysis provided objective and digitized data. The present authors hope that their data will allow physicians to better understand the durational changes in HA fillers and, thus, provide accurate predictions to their patients.     

Efficacy and durability of hyaluronic acid fillers for malar enhancement: A prospective,randomized, split-face clinical controlled trial

Various hyaluronic acid fillers can be used for facial attenuation and rejuvenation. The efficacy and durability of hyaluronic acid fillers are of major concern to dermatologists and patients. This study aimed to evaluate three-dimensional morphology, tissue distribution, and changes in volume after injection of two different hyaluronic acid fillers. Ten Korean women were enrolled in this study. Each subject was injected with monophasic hyaluronic acid filler in one malar area and biphasic filler in the other. Clinical outcome was measured before and after injection, and after 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 weeks, using the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale, photographs and Moire’s topography. Facial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed twice over six months. Both products showed good results after injection and demonstrated good durability over time. MRI was a useful modality for assessing tissue distribution and volume changes. The effects and durability after injection of monophasic hyaluronic acid filler and biphasic hyaluronic acid filler are generally comparable.     

A prospective multicenter clinical trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of a hyaluronic acid-based filler with Tri-Hyal technology in the treatment of lips and the perioral area

Background

Age-related changes of facial soft tissue cause clinical signs of facial aging such as lip atrophy, marionette lines, and an accentuated nasolabial fold. These changes can be modified using dermal fillers.

Aims

To evaluate efficacy, longevity, and safety of a cross-linked hyaluronic acid-based filler with Tri-Hyal technology in the treatment of lips, nasolabial folds, and marionette lines.

Materials and Methods

This prospective, multi-center trial evaluated injections of three different areas (lips, nasolabial fold alone, or with marionette wrinkles) with a soft tissue filler containing 25 mg/ml cross-linked hyaluronic acid and 0.3% lidocaine. Primary endpoint was the aesthetic correction 3 weeks after one injection session without touch-up. Follow-up was 18 months. Assessments were performed using the Global Aesthetic Score (GAS), clinical scoring based on photographic scales, high-frequency ultrasound imaging, and the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS).

Results

In total, 100 subjects were injected. GAS improved significantly for all treatment indications at 3 weeks (p < 0.0001). Success rates were highest for nasolabial folds (98.4%), followed by marionette lines (94.4%) and lips (73.5%). After 18 months post-injection, success was observed in 91%, 88%, and 33% of subjects injected into nasolabial folds, marionette lines, and lips, respectively. GAIS scored highest for nasolabial folds (SGAIS: 71%; IGAIS: 40%), followed by marionette lines (SGAIS: 56%; IGAIS: 33%) and lips (SGAIS: 30%; IGAIS: 22%) at 18 months follow-up.

Conclusions

The filler demonstrated high efficacy and safety in all indications. Regional differences in longevity were evident. Thus, the necessity of regional retreatments should be discussed with patients before injection.