A Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter Comparison of the Efficacy and Tolerability of Restylane Versus Zyplast for the Correction of Nasolabial Folds

Narins, Rhoda S.; Brandt, Fredric S; Leyden, James J.; Lorenc, Paul; Rubin, Mark G.; Smith, Stacy

doi:10.1097/00042728-200306000-00006

Cited by 162 publications

(238 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

229

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another injectable implant of PMMA microspheres, 1-80 lm in diameter but suspended in Mgcarboxy-gluconate (Metacrill), is produced and distributed in Brazil [47].…”

Section: Pmma Microspheresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Histology and Persistence of Various Injectable Filler Substances for Soft Tissue Augmentation

Lemperle

Morhenn

Charrier³

2003

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

456

311

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. An increasing number of soft tissue filler substances have been introduced to the beauty market outside the U.S. which lack experimental and clinical data in support of their claim. Ten commercially available filler substances were examined for biocompatibility and durability: 0.1 cc of each substance was injected deep intradermally into the volar forearm of one of the authors and observed for clinical reaction and permanence. At 1, 3, 6, and 9 months the test sites were excised, histologically examined, and graded according to foreign body reactions classification. Collagen (Zyplast) was phagocytosed at 6 months and hyaluronic acid (Restylane) at 9 months. PMMA microspheres (Artecoll) had encapsulated with connective tissue, macrophages, and sporadic giant cells. Silicone oil (PMS 350) was clinically inconspicuous but dissipated into the tissue, causing a chronic foreign body reaction. Polylactic acid microspheres (New-Fill) induced a mild inflammatory response and had disappeared clinically at 4 months. Dextran microspheres (Reviderm intra) induced a pronounced foreign body reaction and had disappeared at 6 months. Polymethylacrylate particles (Dermalive) induced the lowest cellular reaction but had disappeared clinically at 6 months. Polyacrylamide (Aquamid) was well tolerated and remained palpable to a lessening degree over the entire testing period. Histologically, it dissipated more slowly and was kept in place through fine fibrous capsules. Polyvinylhydroxide microspheres suspended in acrylamide (Evolution) were well tolerated, slowly diminishing over 9 months. Calcium hydroxylapatite microspheres (Radiance FN) induced almost no foreign body reaction but were absorbed by the skin at 12 months.Host defense mechanisms react differently to the various filler materials, but all substances-resorbable or nonresorbable-appeared to be clinically and histologically safe, although all exhibit undesirable side effects. Since the mechanism of late inflammation or granuloma formation is still unknown, early histological findings are not useful in predicting possible late reactions to filler substances.

show abstract

“…Another injectable implant of PMMA microspheres, 1-80 lm in diameter but suspended in Mgcarboxy-gluconate (Metacrill), is produced and distributed in Brazil [47].…”

Section: Pmma Microspheresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Histology and Persistence of Various Injectable Filler Substances for Soft Tissue Augmentation

Lemperle

Morhenn

Charrier³

2003

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

456

311

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…During the visits, clinical subjective assessments were carried out, according to Narins [10] 5-point global improvement scale. Photographic assessments were performed starting from photos standardized by 2 dermatologists with 10 or more years of experience in the technique; ultrasound assessments, intended to assess the product position and volume and cutaneous relief, with ultrasound equipment (model Mysono U6 with 12 MHz transductor); and, finally, assessments of cutaneous micro-relief were performed using the optical equipment Primos Lite (GFMesstechnik GmbH), in order to assess cutaneous relief (fine and deep wrinkles and grooves).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Injectable Polyethylene Glycol Gel as Dermal Filler: 01 Year Clinical and Ultrasound Follow-Up

Addor¹,

Neri²

2016

J Clin Exp Dermatol Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Facial alterations that occur with aging are result of combined effects of soft tissue atrophy with loss of facial volume, gravitational factor and decrease of elastic tissue. In order to minimize these alterations, minimally invasive procedures such as cutaneous filling have been gaining space in clinical practice. In 2008, Scientech CorporationItalia introduced hydrogel of polyethylene glycol (PEG) REMAKE ® as cutaneous filler. This prospective study was developed to prove the effectiveness, safety and durability over the 12 months after the application of PEG hydrogel, commercialized under the name of REMAKE ® . 40 female volunteers were included, between 30 and 60 years, with signs of malar region volume loss between 2 and 3 (Raspaldo's classification) and Nasogenian furrow accentuation, with score between 2 and 3 (Day and collaborators' classification). No patient had carried out procedures of temporary filling for 1 year or permanent filling at any time. Objective parameters always show the scale of the improvement and an evaluation was selected through ultrasound exams and surface scan for evaluation of size and depth of wrinkles improvement. Evaluations by the US were carried out for 30, 120 and 360 days of product use, in a pilot group of 18 patients randomly selected to measure the product in the application plan and numerically assess alterations of volume (absorption/migration). Its durability of up to 01 year after application is proved when no significant reduction.

show abstract

“…38 Yapılan araştırmalara göre, hyaluronik asit sığır kollajenine göre daha kalıcı estetik gelişimi sağlamak-tadır. 26 Hyaluronik asitin maliyetinin ucuz olması, hastaların bu materyali daha çok tercih etmesini sağlamıştır.…”

Section: Hyaluronik Asitunclassified

İntraoral Tedavi̇leri̇ Tamamlayici Peri̇oral Bölgedeki̇ Esteti̇k Çalişmalar

Orbak¹,

Öztürk²

2015

Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter Comparison of the Efficacy and Tolerability of Restylane Versus Zyplast for the Correction of Nasolabial Folds

Cited by 162 publications

References 10 publications

Human Histology and Persistence of Various Injectable Filler Substances for Soft Tissue Augmentation

Human Histology and Persistence of Various Injectable Filler Substances for Soft Tissue Augmentation

Injectable Polyethylene Glycol Gel as Dermal Filler: 01 Year Clinical and Ultrasound Follow-Up

İntraoral Tedavi̇leri̇ Tamamlayici Peri̇oral Bölgedeki̇ Esteti̇k Çalişmalar

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About