Dataset Information

Clinical Observations and the Anatomical Basis of Blindness After Facial Hyaluronic Acid Injection.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Blindness or visual loss is the most serious complication resulting from facial hyaluronic acid (HA) injection. In this study, three recent clinical cases were analyzed, and the relevant anatomy of cadavers was evaluated to investigate the mechanism behind visual impairment due to HA injection. METHODS:Three patients with different extents of visual loss after HA injection were studied. Ophthalmic testing and corresponding treatments were performed, and the clinical progress was observed. In addition, thirty-six fresh Asian cadaver hemifaces were anatomized to investigate the morphology of the ophthalmic artery and its branches. The minimum dose of HA for central retinal artery embolism was calculated based on the ophthalmic arterial volumes of cadavers. RESULTS:Visual impairment was more severe in central retinal artery occlusion and combined intraocular branch occlusion than in posterior ciliary artery occlusion. During follow-up, no improvement was observed in terms of visual impairment. Cadaver study reconfirmed that the ophthalmic artery included facial and intraocular branches. The ophthalmic arterial volumes running from the supraorbital artery and supratrochlear artery to the central retinal artery were 0.083 cm3 and 0.089 cm3, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:The severity of blindness caused by HA injection may be associated with the occlusion site. Our clinical observations indicate that conventional treatments, such as retrobulbar hyaluronidase injection, are insufficient to relieve visual impairment. Injecting as little as 0.08 ml of HA into the facial branch is enough to cause central retinal artery embolism. Limiting the volume per injection could represent a simple prophylactic strategy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: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 .

SUBMITTER: Zhang L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7340666 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical Observations and the Anatomical Basis of Blindness After Facial Hyaluronic Acid Injection.

Zhang Lei L Pan Lei L Xu Hong H Yan Sheng S Sun Yi Y Wu Woffles T L WTL Wu Sufan S

Aesthetic plastic surgery 20190421 4

<h4>Background</h4>Blindness or visual loss is the most serious complication resulting from facial hyaluronic acid (HA) injection. In this study, three recent clinical cases were analyzed, and the relevant anatomy of cadavers was evaluated to investigate the mechanism behind visual impairment due to HA injection.<h4>Methods</h4>Three patients with different extents of visual loss after HA injection were studied. Ophthalmic testing and corresponding treatments were performed, and the clinical pro ...[more]

PMID: 31006827

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe ongoing expansion of the cosmetic armamentarium of facial rejuvenation fails to uncover the inherent risks of cosmetic interventions. Informed consent to all risks of cosmetic filler injections and potential sequelae, including ocular and neurological complications, should be carefully ensured. We present two cases of complications following facial hyaluronic acid filler injections.Case presentationsCase 1: A 43-year-old woman presented with monocular vision loss of the left eye, associated ptosis, ophthalmoplegia, periocular pain and nausea, cutaneous changes of the glabella region and forehead, and sensory impairment in the left maxillary branch dermatome (V2) after receiving a hyaluronic acid (HA) filler injection into the left glabellar area. On ophthalmological examination, an ophthalmic artery occlusion (OAO) was diagnosed upon identification of a "cherry-red spot". Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed a left ischemic optic neuropathy. Supportive therapy and hyaluronidase injections were initiated. A follow-up MRI of the head performed two months after presentation corresponded to stable MRI findings. The patient had irreversible and complete vision loss of the left eye, however, the ptosis resolved. Case 2: A 29-year-old woman was admitted to hospital a few hours after a rhinoplasty and cheek augmentation with hyaluronic acid, presenting with acute monocular vision loss in the right eye, retrobulbar pain, fatigue and vomiting. In addition, the patient presented a harbinger of impending skin necrosis and a complete oculomotor nerve palsy on the right side, choroidal ischemia and vision impairment. Supportive treatment and hyaluronidase injections into the ischemic tissue were initiated. A small scar at the tip of the nose, vision impairment and an irregular pupillary margin on the right side persisted at follow-up.ConclusionThese two case reports and the literature review emphasize the pathophysiological mechanisms leading to potentially devastating complications. In order to reduce the risk of vision loss secondary to cosmetic filler injections, practitioners should possess a thorough knowledge of anatomy and preventive strategies.

Project description:Purpose: Endoscopic dextranomer/hyaluronic acid (Dx/HA) injection is a common treatment for vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) with excellent reported short-term clinical success rates. Long-term outcomes are less well-defined. We assessed long-term outcomes and parental satisfaction after Dx/HA injection for primary VUR with >5-year follow-up. Materials and Methods: Families of all patients who underwent Dx/HA injection for primary VUR at our institution between 2008 and 2012 were contacted for telephone interview. Data collected by phone included parental satisfaction and presence and severity of UTIs pre-operatively and post-operatively. Patient demographics, radiographic VUR data, need for secondary surgery, and surgical indications were obtained through chart review. Results: Five hundred and seventy-five patients underwent Dx/HA injection for primary VUR between 2008 and 2012. Ninety-nine (17.2%) of these patients' parents were successfully contacted and interviewed. Median follow-up time from surgery to survey was 8.4 (IQR 6.8-9.6) years. Secondary surgery was performed in 13/99 (13.1%), most commonly repeat Dx/HA injection. Seven patients (7.1%) underwent secondary Dx/HA injection for persistent VUR without UTIs at a median of 0.35 (IQR 0.33-0.77) years post-operatively. Five patients (5.1%) underwent Dx/HA injection (n = 3) or ureteral reimplantation (n = 2) for VUR with febrile UTIs (fUTIs) at a median of 2.2 (IQR 1.3-5.1) years. One patient had ureteral reimplantation for symptomatic obstruction 2.8 years after initial surgery. Only 3/99 (3.0%) required open or laparoscopic surgery after Dx/HA injection. Eighty-three families (84.7%) reported ≥1 fUTIs pre-operatively. Of these, only 9/83 (10.8%) reported fUTIs post-operatively, for an overall clinical success rate of 89.2%. Clinical success was 93.1% in patients whose pre-operative fUTIs were treated outpatient and 80.0% in those hospitalized at least once for fUTI treatment pre-operatively. Ninety-four percent of parents were highly satisfied, 2.4% partially satisfied, and 3.5% dissatisfied. Conclusions: Endoscopic injection with Dx/HA for primary VUR appears to have good long-term clinical success rates and high parental satisfaction, mirroring our previously reported short-term results. Post-operative ureteral obstruction is rare but may occur years post-operatively, justifying initial sonographic surveillance, and repeat imaging in symptomatic patients.

Dataset Information

Clinical Observations and the Anatomical Basis of Blindness After Facial Hyaluronic Acid Injection.

Publications

Clinical Observations and the Anatomical Basis of Blindness After Facial Hyaluronic Acid Injection.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets