Dataset Information

Comparative Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Novel Hyaluronic Acid-Polynucleotide Complex Dermal Filler.

ABSTRACT: HA (Hyaluronic acid) filler, the most commonly used dermal filler, causes several side effects. HA-PN (Hyaluronic acid-Polynucleotide), a new composite filler, has excellent biocompatibility and induces tissue regeneration. In this study, we compare the efficacies and safety profiles of these fillers. The characteristics of HA and HA-PN fillers were compared using scanning electron microscopy and rheometry. No morphological difference was noted between the fillers. However, the latter had higher viscosity and elasticity values. The HA-PN filler induced higher cell migration than the HA filler in a wound healing assay. It was also found to stimulate better collagen synthesis in human and mouse fibroblasts. The HA and HA-PN fillers were injected into SKH1 hairless mice to determine changes in their volume for up to 24 weeks. Increased cell migration and collagen synthesis were observed in mice injected with the HA-PN complex filler. Although the safety and durability of the HA and HA-PN fillers were similar, the latter induced a lower transient receptor potential vanilloid 4 expression and caused less stimulation upon injection. In conclusion, HA-PN complex fillers can stimulate fibroblast growth and facilitate volume growth and skin regeneration.

SUBMITTER: Kim JH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7083941 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Novel Hyaluronic Acid-Polynucleotide Complex Dermal Filler.

Kim Jong Hwan JH Kwon Tae-Rin TR Lee Sung Eun SE Jang Yoo Na YN Han Hye Sung HS Mun Seog Kyun SK Kim Beom Joon BJ

Scientific reports 20200320 1

HA (Hyaluronic acid) filler, the most commonly used dermal filler, causes several side effects. HA-PN (Hyaluronic acid-Polynucleotide), a new composite filler, has excellent biocompatibility and induces tissue regeneration. In this study, we compare the efficacies and safety profiles of these fillers. The characteristics of HA and HA-PN fillers were compared using scanning electron microscopy and rheometry. No morphological difference was noted between the fillers. However, the latter had higher ...[more]

PMID: 32198443

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction: The lips and the mouth play an indispensable role in vocalization, mastication and face aesthetics. Various noxious factors may alter and destruct the original structure, and appearance of the lips and the anatomical area surrounding the mouth. The application of hyaluronic acid (HA) may serve as a safe method for lip regeneration. Although a number of studies exist for HA effectiveness and safety, its beneficial effect is not well-established. Aim: The present meta-analysis and systematic review was performed to investigate the effectiveness of HA on lip augmentation. We also investigated the types and nature of adverse effects (AEs) of HA application. Methods: We reported our meta-analysis in accordance with the PRISMA Statement. PROSPERO protocol registration: CRD42018102899. We performed the systematic literature search in CENTRAL, Embase, and MEDLINE. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, case series and case reports were included. The untransformed proportion (random-effects, DerSimonian-Laird method) of responder rate to HA injection was calculated. For treatment related AEs descriptive statistics were used. Results: The systematic literature search yielded 32 eligible records for descriptive statistics and 10 records for quantitative synthesis. The results indicated that the overall estimate of responders (percentage of subjects with increased lip fullness by one point or higher) was 91% (ES = 0.91, 95% CI:0.85-0.96) 2 months after injection. The rate of responders was 74% (ES = 0.74, 95% CI:0.66-0.82) and 46% (ES = 0.46, 95% CI:0.28-0.65) after 6 and 12 months, respectively. We included 1,496 participants for estimating the event rates of AEs. The most frequent treatment-related AEs were tenderness (88.8%), injection site swelling (74.3%) and bruising (39.5%). Rare AEs included foreign body granulomas (0.6%), herpes labialis (0.6%) and angioedema (0.3%). Conclusion: Our meta-analysis revealed that lip augmentation with injectable HA is an efficient method for increasing lip fullness for at least up to 6 months after augmentation. Moreover, we found that most AEs of HA treatment were mild or moderate, but a small number of serious adverse effects were also found. In conclusion, further well-designed RCTs are still needed to make the presently available evidence stronger.

Project description:Importance:Although hyaluronidase is known to remove hyaluronic acid fillers, use of low doses has not been well studied. Objective:To assess the effectiveness and dose-related effect of small quantities of hyaluronidase to treat hyaluronic acid filler nodules. Design, Setting, and Participants:Split-arm, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial at an urban academic center. Participants were 9 healthy women. Recruitment and follow-up occurred from February 2013 to March 2014; data analysis occurred from February to July 2016. Interventions:Each participant received aliquots (buttons) of either of 2 types of hyaluronic acid fillers into bilateral upper inner arms, respectively. At 1, 2, and 3 weeks each button was treated with a constant volume (0.1 mL) of variable-dose hyaluronidase (1.5, 3.0, or 9.0 U per 0.1 mL) or saline control. Main Outcomes and Measures:Both a blinded dermatologist and the participant independently assessed detectability. Results:Seventy-two treatment sites on 9 women (mean [SD] age, 45.8 [15.7] years) received all interventions and were analyzed. There was a significant difference in physician rater assessment between saline and hyaluronidase at 4 weeks (visual detection: mean difference = 1.15; 95% CI, 0.46-1.80; P < .001; palpability: mean difference = 1.22; 95% CI, 0.61-1.83; P < .001) and 4 months (visual detection: mean difference = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.33-1.26; P = .001; palpability: mean difference = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.38-1.25; P < .001) that was mirrored by participant self-assessment at 4 weeks (visual detection: mean difference = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.26-1.48; P = .006; palpability: mean difference = 1.59; 95% CI, 1.41-1.77; P < .001) and 4 months (visual detection: mean difference = 1.31; 95% CI, 1.09-1.53; P < .001; palpability: mean difference = 1.52; 95% CI, 1.03-2.01; P < .001), and hyaluronidase was associated with greater resolution of buttons compared with normal saline. The 9.0-unit hyaluronidase injection sites were significantly less palpable than the 1.5-unit sites at both 4 weeks (mean difference = 0.50; 95% CI, 0.01-.99; P = .045) and 4 months (mean difference = 0.47; 95% CI, 0.14-0.81; P = .007). Dose dependence was more notable for Restylane-L. Conclusions and Relevance:Although very small doses of hyaluronidase can remove hyaluronic acid fillers from patient skin, slightly higher doses often result in more rapid resolution. Trial Registration:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01722916.

Dataset Information

Comparative Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Novel Hyaluronic Acid-Polynucleotide Complex Dermal Filler.

Publications

Comparative Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Novel Hyaluronic Acid-Polynucleotide Complex Dermal Filler.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets