Micheels Patrick, Besse Stéphanie, Sarazin Didier, Quinodoz Pierre, Elias Badwi, Safa Marva, Vandeputte Joan
Private Practice, Geneva, Switzerland; MedImage RX Institute, Geneva, Switzerland; Laboratoire Viollier, Geneva, Switzerland; Private Practice, Neuchâtel, Switzerland; and Private Practice, Oudenaarde, Belgium.
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017 Feb 24;5(2):e1222. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000001222. eCollection 2017 Feb.
This study examined the influence of hyaluronic acid (HA) crosslinking technology on the ultrasound and histologic behavior of HA fillers designed for subcutaneous injection.
One subject received subcutaneous injections of 0.25 ml Cohesive Polydensified Matrix (CPM) and Vycross volumizing HA in tissue scheduled for abdominoplasty by bolus and retrograde fanning techniques. Ultrasound analyses were performed on days 0 and 8 and histologic analyses on days 0 and 21 after injection. A series of simple rheologic tests was also performed.
Day 0 ultrasound images after bolus injection showed CPM and Vycross as hypoechogenic papules in the hypodermis. CPM appeared little changed after gentle massage, whereas Vycross appeared more hyperechogenic and diminished in size. Ultrasound images at day 8 were similar. On day 0, both gels appeared less hypoechogenic after retrograde fanning than after bolus injection. Vycross was interspersed with hyperechogenic areas (fibrous septa from the fat network structure) and unlike CPM became almost completely invisible after gentle massage. On day 8, CPM appeared as a hypoechogenic pool and Vycross as a long, thin rod. Day 0 histologic findings confirmed ultrasound results. Day 21 CPM histologic findings showed a discrete inflammatory reaction along the injection row after retrograde fanning. Vycross had a more pronounced inflammatory reaction, particularly after retrograde fanning, with macrophages and giant cells surrounding the implant. Rheologic tests showed CPM to have greater cohesivity and resistance to traction forces than Vycross.
CPM HA volumizer appears to maintain greater tissue integrity than Vycross after subcutaneous injection with less inflammatory activity.
本研究探讨了透明质酸(HA)交联技术对皮下注射用HA填充剂超声及组织学表现的影响。
一名受试者在计划行腹部整形术的组织中,通过团注法和逆行扇形注射技术皮下注射了0.25 ml的凝聚性多密度基质(CPM)和Vycross容积性HA。在注射后第0天和第8天进行超声分析,在注射后第0天和第21天进行组织学分析。还进行了一系列简单的流变学测试。
团注注射后第0天的超声图像显示,CPM和Vycross在皮下为低回声丘疹。轻轻按摩后,CPM变化不大,而Vycross回声增强且体积减小。第8天的超声图像相似。在第0天,逆行扇形注射后两种凝胶的低回声均比团注注射后减弱。Vycross散布有高回声区域(来自脂肪网络结构的纤维间隔),与CPM不同,轻轻按摩后几乎完全不可见。第8天,CPM表现为低回声池,Vycross表现为细长条。第0天的组织学结果证实了超声结果。第21天,CPM的组织学结果显示逆行扇形注射后沿注射行有离散的炎症反应。Vycross有更明显的炎症反应,尤其是逆行扇形注射后,植入物周围有巨噬细胞和巨细胞。流变学测试显示CPM比Vycross具有更大的内聚性和抗牵引力。
皮下注射后,CPM HA填充剂似乎比Vycross能更好地维持组织完整性,且炎症活性较低。