logo

An 18-Month Follow-up, Randomized Comparison of Effectiveness and Safety of Two Hyaluronic Acid Fillers for Treatment of Moderate Nasolabial Folds

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Hyaluronic acid (HA) filler injection is a popular nonsurgical aesthetic procedure.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness and safety of 2 hyaluronic acid fillers (HAEC and HARES) for treatment of moderate nasolabial folds (NLFs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was an evaluator- and subject-blinded split-face study. HAEC or HARES was randomly assigned to the left or right NLF at baseline. Retreatment was performed after 9 months; follow-up extended to 18 months after baseline (9 months after retreatment). Effectiveness assessments included the Wrinkle Severity Rating Scale (WSRS) and subject preference. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs) and local tolerability symptoms recorded by subjects during 3 weeks after treatment.

RESULTS

HAEC was noninferior to HARES measured as mean change from baseline in WSRS score at 6 months. Mean WSRS score change from baseline was similar between products up to 18 months. A majority of subjects (>70%) were still responders at 18 months (after retreatment at 9 months). The volume required at retreatment was approximately two-thirds of that at baseline. There was no difference in subject preference between products. Both fillers were well tolerated and associated with few treatment-related AEs.

CONCLUSION

HAEC and HARES were effective and well tolerated for treatment of moderate NLFs.

    loading  Loading Related Articles

Join Ovid Insights!

Benefits of Ovid Insights Include:

  • Consolidated email digests of the latest research in your favorite topics
  • A personalized dashboard of your topics all on one page 
  • Tools to bookmark and share articles of interest
  • Ability to customize and save your own searches

Register with Ovid Insights »