...
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology >A comparison of the efficacy, safety, and longevity of two different hyaluronic acid dermal fillers in the treatment of severe nasolabial folds: a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blind, within-subject study
【24h】

A comparison of the efficacy, safety, and longevity of two different hyaluronic acid dermal fillers in the treatment of severe nasolabial folds: a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blind, within-subject study

机译:两种不同的透明质酸真皮填充剂治疗严重鼻唇沟的功效,安全性和寿命的比较:多中心,前瞻性,随机,对照,单盲,受试者内研究

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background: Commercially available hyaluronic acid (HA)-based fillers have distinct physicochemical properties related to their specific manufacturing technology, including HA concentration, cross-linking percentage, and particle size. These factors may determine treatment effectiveness, safety, and longevity; however, this requires confirmation in the clinic.Methods: To compare the efficacy, safety, and longevity of two distinct HA-based dermal fillers in the correction of severe nasolabial folds (NLFs), a 24 mg/mL smooth gel (Juvederm ULTRA PLUS? [JUP]) and a 20 mg/mL particulate gel (Perlane? [PER]) were injected in a total of 80 normal, healthy subjects using a split face design and were followed for 12 months in this prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter study.Results: Both fillers achieved a clinically relevant NLF correction (one point or more improvement, based on a validated NLF severity scale). However, JUP displayed greater longevity, with this correction maintained in a significantly larger percentage of NLFs after 6 months (physician's evaluation) or 9 months (subject's evaluation) and thereafter for the remainder of the study (70% vs 45%; P = 0.0002 and 62.5% vs 46.3%; P = 0.01 at month 12, based on physician and subject assessments, respectively). At month 12, 71.4% of the subjects nominated a preference for the NLF injected with JUP (P < 0.0001). Both treatments were well tolerated.Conclusion: These results suggest that different physicochemical properties of HA-based fillers, associated with distinct manufacturing technologies, may influence treatment longevity in the correction of volume deficits. This may relate to a differential resistance to hyaluronidase and/or free radical degradation as previously documented in vitro.
机译:背景:市售的透明质酸(HA)基填料具有与其特定制造技术相关的独特理化特性,包括HA浓度,交联百分比和粒度。这些因素可能决定治疗的有效性,安全性和寿命。方法:为了比较两种不同的基于HA的真皮填充剂在纠正严重的鼻唇沟(NLFs),24 mg / mL光滑凝胶(Juvederm ULTRA PLUS)的功效,安全性和寿命[JUP])和20 mg / mL颗粒状凝胶(Perlane®[PER])采用分脸设计注射入总共80位正常健康受试者中,并在此前瞻性,随机,对照,结果:两种填充剂均实现了临床相关的NLF校正(基于经过验证的NLF严重程度评分,提高了一个百分点或更多)。但是,JUP的寿命更长,在6个月(医师评估)或9个月(受试者评估)之后以及之后的其余研究中(70%对45%; P = 0.0002),这种矫正维持在相当大比例的NLF中分别为62.5%和46.3%;根据医生和受试者的评估,第12个月的P = 0.01)。在第12月,有71.4%的受试者指定了优先注射JUP的NLF(P <0.0001)。结论:这些结果表明,基于HA的填充剂的不同理化性质,与不同的制造技术相关,可能会影响纠正体积缺陷的治疗寿命。如先前在体外所记录的,这可能与对透明质酸酶和/或自由基降解的不同抗性有关。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号