Efficacy and safety of a new hyaluronic acid dermal filler in the treatment of moderate nasolabial folds: 6-month interim results of a randomized, evaluator-blinded, intra-individual comparison study

Abstract

Emervel Classic provides similar efficacy and better overall local tolerability compared with Restylane 6 months after treatment of moderate nasolabial folds.

Clinical comparison between two hyaluronic acid-derived fillers in the treatment of nasolabial folds in Chinese subjects: BioHyalux versus Restylane

“…The efficacy of Restylane observed in the present study was consistent with previous reports and sometimes even better [1,2,[10][11][12][13]. In the study by Rzany et al [13], 78.8 % of sides treated with Restylane had over 1 score improvement 6 months after injection.…”

“…In the study by Rzany et al [13], 78.8 % of sides treated with Restylane had over 1 score improvement 6 months after injection. Baumann et al [1] treated 439 subjects (with moderate or severe NLF) with one of three types of HA dermal fillers, and 81-90 % of HA dermal filler-treated NLF maintained a clinically significant improvement from baseline to over 6 months.…”

“…It was introduced in the market in Europe in 1996 for the correction of moderate facial wrinkles, facial folds, and lips [1,2,[10][11][12][13]. Preliminary clinical findings indicate that Restylane is well tolerated after subdermal injection and that it provides good initial efficacy in correcting facial wrinkles and folds [11,13]. BioHyalux (Bloomage Freda Biopharm Co., Ltd, Shandong, China) is a new hyaluronic acid gel using the highly effective crosslinking (HEC) technique.…”

Introduction to Fillers

“…One noncross-linked formulation (Revanesse Pure) is used for skin hydration. 162 Six-month interim data from an ongoing pivotal US trial comparing Emervel Classic Lidocaine and Juvéderm Ultra XC in 170 patients demonstrated similar efficacy and safety. Redexis targets deep folds and is used for facial contouring.…”

Efficacy and safety of a new monophasic hyaluronic acid filler in the correction of nasolabial folds: a randomized, evaluator-blinded, split-face study

“…In our present randomized, patient-and evaluator-blinded, split-face comparative study, the efficacy and safety of mono-HA in the treatment of moderate to severe nasolabial folds was evaluated in comparison with biphasic HA (bi-HA). Our findings are clinically relevant because they compare a new filler with a well-studied bi-HA filler, of which the efficacy and safety have been investigated extensively (1,(6)(7)(8).…”