Randomized, Evaluator-Blinded Study Comparing Safety and Effect of Two Hyaluronic Acid Gels for Lips Enhancement
BACKGROUNDHyaluronic acid (HA) fillers may differ in terms of gel characteristics and ease of use and it is of interest whether this might affect safety and duration of effect. OBJECTIVETo compare the long-term safety and effect of 2 HA fillers produced by 2 different technologies for lip enhancemen...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Dermatologic surgery 2018-02, Vol.44 (2), p.261-269 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 269 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 261 |
| container_title | Dermatologic surgery |
| container_volume | 44 |
| creator | Hilton, Said Sattler, Gerhard Berg, Anna-Karin Samuelson, Ulf Wong, Cindy |
| description | BACKGROUNDHyaluronic acid (HA) fillers may differ in terms of gel characteristics and ease of use and it is of interest whether this might affect safety and duration of effect.
OBJECTIVETo compare the long-term safety and effect of 2 HA fillers produced by 2 different technologies for lip enhancement.
MATERIALS AND METHODSSubjects with very thin to moderately thick lips were randomized and treated with HA-RK (N = 31) or HA-JV (N = 29) to improve lip fullness by ≥ 1 grade on a 5-point scale, using a maximum of 3 mL of product.
RESULTSA smaller volume of HA-RK compared with HA-JV was required to improve lip fullness by ≥ 1 grade (mean1.54 mL vs 1.94 mL, p < .001). Despite the smaller volume, lip fullness and global aesthetic improvement were comparably sustained in both groups. At 6 months, 60.0% versus 57.7% of subjects (HA-RK vs HA-JV) had improved lip fullness. At 12 months, 71.4% versus 76.0% had aesthetic improvement (blinded evaluations) and 85.7% versus 86.2% felt more attractive. Both products were well tolerated.
CONCLUSIONBoth products achieved durable improvement in lip fullness and aesthetic appearance. A significantly smaller amount of HA-RK was required compared with HA-JV to achieve optimal treatment effect. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1097/DSS.0000000000001282 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5821480</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1955061682</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5282-9b9e77491923daefb94c8d20c9290ee7d04ab0794ddeab5aa8ee78618ae46bed3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkVFvFCEUhYnR2Fr9B8bw6INTgYUZeDGp69qabGLi1mfCwJ0uygwjzHSz_nrZbG2qD8oLXDjfuZcchF5Sck6Jat5-2GzOyYNFmWSP0CkVjFe8YeJxOZOmroig7AQ9y_nbQaMW5Ck6YYoIRXl9isYvZnCx9z_BvcGrWxNmM8VUvQ9-cODwZprdHi9jP5rkhxu8MR1Me1wYvOo6sBOOHb7eRXy1L2iKg7f4wnqHLyFk3MWE137MeDVszWChh2F6jp50JmR4cbefoa8fV9fLq2r9-fLT8mJdWVE-UqlWQdNwRRVbOANdq7iVjhGryuwAjSPctKRR3DkwrTBGlktZU2mA1y24xRl6d_Qd57YHZ0vrZIIek-9N2utovP7zZfBbfRNvtZCMckmKwes7gxR_zJAn3ftsIQQzQJyzpkoIUtNasiLlR6lNMecE3X0bSvQhLF3C0n-HVbBXD0e8h36nUwTyKNjFMEHK38O8g6S3YMK0_Z83_wdaVJw1TFaMUElYKasDqBa_AHrbspI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1955061682</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Randomized, Evaluator-Blinded Study Comparing Safety and Effect of Two Hyaluronic Acid Gels for Lips Enhancement</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Hilton, Said ; Sattler, Gerhard ; Berg, Anna-Karin ; Samuelson, Ulf ; Wong, Cindy</creator><creatorcontrib>Hilton, Said ; Sattler, Gerhard ; Berg, Anna-Karin ; Samuelson, Ulf ; Wong, Cindy</creatorcontrib><description>BACKGROUNDHyaluronic acid (HA) fillers may differ in terms of gel characteristics and ease of use and it is of interest whether this might affect safety and duration of effect.
OBJECTIVETo compare the long-term safety and effect of 2 HA fillers produced by 2 different technologies for lip enhancement.
MATERIALS AND METHODSSubjects with very thin to moderately thick lips were randomized and treated with HA-RK (N = 31) or HA-JV (N = 29) to improve lip fullness by ≥ 1 grade on a 5-point scale, using a maximum of 3 mL of product.
RESULTSA smaller volume of HA-RK compared with HA-JV was required to improve lip fullness by ≥ 1 grade (mean1.54 mL vs 1.94 mL, p < .001). Despite the smaller volume, lip fullness and global aesthetic improvement were comparably sustained in both groups. At 6 months, 60.0% versus 57.7% of subjects (HA-RK vs HA-JV) had improved lip fullness. At 12 months, 71.4% versus 76.0% had aesthetic improvement (blinded evaluations) and 85.7% versus 86.2% felt more attractive. Both products were well tolerated.
CONCLUSIONBoth products achieved durable improvement in lip fullness and aesthetic appearance. A significantly smaller amount of HA-RK was required compared with HA-JV to achieve optimal treatment effect.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1076-0512</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1524-4725</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/DSS.0000000000001282</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29059146</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: by the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery, Inc. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved</publisher><subject>Adult ; Cosmetic Techniques ; Dermal Fillers - therapeutic use ; Female ; Gels ; Humans ; Hyaluronic Acid - analogs & derivatives ; Hyaluronic Acid - therapeutic use ; Injections, Subcutaneous ; Lip - drug effects ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Original ; Single-Blind Method ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Dermatologic surgery, 2018-02, Vol.44 (2), p.261-269</ispartof><rights>2018 by the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery, Inc. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>2017 by the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery, Inc. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>2017 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery, Inc. 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5282-9b9e77491923daefb94c8d20c9290ee7d04ab0794ddeab5aa8ee78618ae46bed3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5282-9b9e77491923daefb94c8d20c9290ee7d04ab0794ddeab5aa8ee78618ae46bed3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29059146$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hilton, Said</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sattler, Gerhard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berg, Anna-Karin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Samuelson, Ulf</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wong, Cindy</creatorcontrib><title>Randomized, Evaluator-Blinded Study Comparing Safety and Effect of Two Hyaluronic Acid Gels for Lips Enhancement</title><title>Dermatologic surgery</title><addtitle>Dermatol Surg</addtitle><description>BACKGROUNDHyaluronic acid (HA) fillers may differ in terms of gel characteristics and ease of use and it is of interest whether this might affect safety and duration of effect.
OBJECTIVETo compare the long-term safety and effect of 2 HA fillers produced by 2 different technologies for lip enhancement.
MATERIALS AND METHODSSubjects with very thin to moderately thick lips were randomized and treated with HA-RK (N = 31) or HA-JV (N = 29) to improve lip fullness by ≥ 1 grade on a 5-point scale, using a maximum of 3 mL of product.
RESULTSA smaller volume of HA-RK compared with HA-JV was required to improve lip fullness by ≥ 1 grade (mean1.54 mL vs 1.94 mL, p < .001). Despite the smaller volume, lip fullness and global aesthetic improvement were comparably sustained in both groups. At 6 months, 60.0% versus 57.7% of subjects (HA-RK vs HA-JV) had improved lip fullness. At 12 months, 71.4% versus 76.0% had aesthetic improvement (blinded evaluations) and 85.7% versus 86.2% felt more attractive. Both products were well tolerated.
CONCLUSIONBoth products achieved durable improvement in lip fullness and aesthetic appearance. A significantly smaller amount of HA-RK was required compared with HA-JV to achieve optimal treatment effect.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Cosmetic Techniques</subject><subject>Dermal Fillers - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gels</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hyaluronic Acid - analogs & derivatives</subject><subject>Hyaluronic Acid - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Injections, Subcutaneous</subject><subject>Lip - drug effects</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Single-Blind Method</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>1076-0512</issn><issn>1524-4725</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkVFvFCEUhYnR2Fr9B8bw6INTgYUZeDGp69qabGLi1mfCwJ0uygwjzHSz_nrZbG2qD8oLXDjfuZcchF5Sck6Jat5-2GzOyYNFmWSP0CkVjFe8YeJxOZOmroig7AQ9y_nbQaMW5Ck6YYoIRXl9isYvZnCx9z_BvcGrWxNmM8VUvQ9-cODwZprdHi9jP5rkhxu8MR1Me1wYvOo6sBOOHb7eRXy1L2iKg7f4wnqHLyFk3MWE137MeDVszWChh2F6jp50JmR4cbefoa8fV9fLq2r9-fLT8mJdWVE-UqlWQdNwRRVbOANdq7iVjhGryuwAjSPctKRR3DkwrTBGlktZU2mA1y24xRl6d_Qd57YHZ0vrZIIek-9N2utovP7zZfBbfRNvtZCMckmKwes7gxR_zJAn3ftsIQQzQJyzpkoIUtNasiLlR6lNMecE3X0bSvQhLF3C0n-HVbBXD0e8h36nUwTyKNjFMEHK38O8g6S3YMK0_Z83_wdaVJw1TFaMUElYKasDqBa_AHrbspI</recordid><startdate>201802</startdate><enddate>201802</enddate><creator>Hilton, Said</creator><creator>Sattler, Gerhard</creator><creator>Berg, Anna-Karin</creator><creator>Samuelson, Ulf</creator><creator>Wong, Cindy</creator><general>by the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery, Inc. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved</general><general>Lippincott Williams & Wilkins</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201802</creationdate><title>Randomized, Evaluator-Blinded Study Comparing Safety and Effect of Two Hyaluronic Acid Gels for Lips Enhancement</title><author>Hilton, Said ; Sattler, Gerhard ; Berg, Anna-Karin ; Samuelson, Ulf ; Wong, Cindy</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5282-9b9e77491923daefb94c8d20c9290ee7d04ab0794ddeab5aa8ee78618ae46bed3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Cosmetic Techniques</topic><topic>Dermal Fillers - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gels</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hyaluronic Acid - analogs & derivatives</topic><topic>Hyaluronic Acid - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Injections, Subcutaneous</topic><topic>Lip - drug effects</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Single-Blind Method</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hilton, Said</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sattler, Gerhard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berg, Anna-Karin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Samuelson, Ulf</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wong, Cindy</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Dermatologic surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hilton, Said</au><au>Sattler, Gerhard</au><au>Berg, Anna-Karin</au><au>Samuelson, Ulf</au><au>Wong, Cindy</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Randomized, Evaluator-Blinded Study Comparing Safety and Effect of Two Hyaluronic Acid Gels for Lips Enhancement</atitle><jtitle>Dermatologic surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Dermatol Surg</addtitle><date>2018-02</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>44</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>261</spage><epage>269</epage><pages>261-269</pages><issn>1076-0512</issn><eissn>1524-4725</eissn><abstract>BACKGROUNDHyaluronic acid (HA) fillers may differ in terms of gel characteristics and ease of use and it is of interest whether this might affect safety and duration of effect.
OBJECTIVETo compare the long-term safety and effect of 2 HA fillers produced by 2 different technologies for lip enhancement.
MATERIALS AND METHODSSubjects with very thin to moderately thick lips were randomized and treated with HA-RK (N = 31) or HA-JV (N = 29) to improve lip fullness by ≥ 1 grade on a 5-point scale, using a maximum of 3 mL of product.
RESULTSA smaller volume of HA-RK compared with HA-JV was required to improve lip fullness by ≥ 1 grade (mean1.54 mL vs 1.94 mL, p < .001). Despite the smaller volume, lip fullness and global aesthetic improvement were comparably sustained in both groups. At 6 months, 60.0% versus 57.7% of subjects (HA-RK vs HA-JV) had improved lip fullness. At 12 months, 71.4% versus 76.0% had aesthetic improvement (blinded evaluations) and 85.7% versus 86.2% felt more attractive. Both products were well tolerated.
CONCLUSIONBoth products achieved durable improvement in lip fullness and aesthetic appearance. A significantly smaller amount of HA-RK was required compared with HA-JV to achieve optimal treatment effect.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>by the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery, Inc. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved</pub><pmid>29059146</pmid><doi>10.1097/DSS.0000000000001282</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1076-0512 |
| ispartof | Dermatologic surgery, 2018-02, Vol.44 (2), p.261-269 |
| issn | 1076-0512 1524-4725 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5821480 |
| source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete |
| subjects | Adult Cosmetic Techniques Dermal Fillers - therapeutic use Female Gels Humans Hyaluronic Acid - analogs & derivatives Hyaluronic Acid - therapeutic use Injections, Subcutaneous Lip - drug effects Male Middle Aged Original Single-Blind Method Young Adult |
| title | Randomized, Evaluator-Blinded Study Comparing Safety and Effect of Two Hyaluronic Acid Gels for Lips Enhancement |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T20%3A11%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Randomized,%20Evaluator-Blinded%20Study%20Comparing%20Safety%20and%20Effect%20of%20Two%20Hyaluronic%20Acid%20Gels%20for%20Lips%20Enhancement&rft.jtitle=Dermatologic%20surgery&rft.au=Hilton,%20Said&rft.date=2018-02&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=261&rft.epage=269&rft.pages=261-269&rft.issn=1076-0512&rft.eissn=1524-4725&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/DSS.0000000000001282&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1955061682%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1955061682&rft_id=info:pmid/29059146&rfr_iscdi=true |