Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Nowon Eulji Medical Center, School of Medicine, Eulji University, 68, Hangeulbiseok-ro, Nowon-gu, Seoul, South Korea.
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2021 Dec;45(6):2902-2908. doi: 10.1007/s00266-021-02252-0. Epub 2021 Apr 13.
Hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers have been widely used in humans since 1958 because of their biomedical safety. Restylane was introduced in the1990s as a favorable temporary filler option for facial augmentation. Subsequently, many new HA filler products, including the Sardenyashape, have been introduced, but comparative studies of these products are limited. Here, we compared tolerability (wrinkle severity rating scale, WSRS), pain (visual analog scale, VAS score), satisfaction (global esthetic improvement scale, GAIS), and safety of a new monophasic HA (MHA) filler (Sardenyashape) containing lidocaine, used to correct nasolabial folds (NLFs), with those of biphasic HA (BHA) filler (Restylane LYFT) containing lidocaine.
We enrolled 96 participants with visible NLFs in this randomized, double-blind, single-center clinical study. Participants were injected with a new MHA filler in one NLF and a BHA filler and were reassessed for cosmetic changes at 8 and 24 weeks. Wrinkle severity was assessed using the 5-point WSRS.
At week 24, the mean improvement in WSRS compared to baseline was 1.92 ± 0.75 and 2.24 ± 0.66 for MHA and BHA fillers, respectively, and corresponding average pain values using the VAS score 30 min after the procedure were 0.04 ± 0.25 and 0.02 ± 0.15, respectively, showing no significant difference. Average GAIS values 8 weeks after the procedure with MHA and BHA fillers were 1.89 ± 0.77 and 1.40 ± 0.82, respectively (p < 0.001). Both fillers were well tolerated, with mild adverse reactions.
The evaluation of the effect of Sardenyashape with lidocaine on NLF in this study proved its effectiveness and safety for use in correcting NLF.
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
自 1958 年以来,由于其生物医学安全性,透明质酸(HA)填充剂已在人类中广泛使用。Restylane 于 20 世纪 90 年代作为一种有利的临时填充剂选择,用于面部增强。随后,许多新型 HA 填充剂产品,包括 Sardenyashape,已经推出,但这些产品的比较研究有限。在这里,我们比较了一种新的单相 HA(MHA)填充剂(Sardenyashape)的耐受性(皱纹严重程度评分量表,WSRS)、疼痛(视觉模拟量表,VAS 评分)、满意度(整体美学改善量表,GAIS)和安全性,该填充剂含有利多卡因,用于纠正鼻唇沟(NLF),与含有利多卡因的双相 HA(BHA)填充剂(Restylane LYFT)的结果。
我们在这项随机、双盲、单中心临床研究中招募了 96 名有可见 NLF 的参与者。参与者在一侧 NLF 注射新型 MHA 填充剂,在另一侧注射 BHA 填充剂,并在 8 周和 24 周时再次评估美容变化。使用 5 分 WSRS 评估皱纹严重程度。
在第 24 周,与基线相比,MHA 和 BHA 填充剂的 WSRS 平均改善分别为 1.92±0.75 和 2.24±0.66,分别在手术后 30 分钟时使用 VAS 评分的平均疼痛值为 0.04±0.25 和 0.02±0.15,无显著差异。在手术后 8 周时,MHA 和 BHA 填充剂的平均 GAIS 值分别为 1.89±0.77 和 1.40±0.82(p<0.001)。两种填充物均耐受性良好,仅有轻度不良反应。
本研究评估了含有利多卡因的 Sardenyashape 对 NLF 的效果,证明其对纠正 NLF 有效且安全。
证据水平 II:本杂志要求作者为每篇文章分配一个证据水平。有关这些循证医学评级的完整描述,请参阅目录或在线作者指南 www.springer.com/00266。