Barone Mauro, De Bernardis Riccardo, Persichetti Paolo
Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Via Alvaro del Portillo 200, 00128, Roma, Italy.
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2025 Apr;49(7):2137-2139. doi: 10.1007/s00266-024-04104-z. Epub 2024 May 8.
Soft tissue augmentation with fillers has witnessed a surge in popularity for rejuvenating facial features, offering solutions for wrinkles, volume loss, and contour irregularities. Non-biodegradable fillers like silicone, polyacrylamide hydrogel, and polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) have been introduced, promising enduring results. However, reports on silicone filler usage have highlighted a spectrum of adverse events, ranging from erythema and edema to more severe complications like infection, vascular occlusion, and inflammatory nodules. The adverse effects of non-resorbable facial fillers can manifest even years post-procedure, resulting in significant discomfort and dissatisfaction for patients. Consequently, the literature is focusing on potential treatments for these outcomes, including systemic antibiotics, corticosteroid injections, surgical drainage, and excision. Despite these options, consensus on optimal treatment modalities remains elusive. Surgical excision is the definitive method for removing permanent fillers, albeit with the risk of post-removal irregularities. Fat grafting has emerged as a viable solution, allowing for the correction of volume deficits and asymmetries. Utilizing the patient's own tissue, fat grafting reduces the risk of adverse reactions and rejection. It offers targeted volume enhancement, restoring facial symmetry and proportion, and promoting tissue healing and regeneration through the presence of stem cells. After permanent filler removal, further filler injections are not advisable. In such cases, fat grafting offers several advantages, including reduced risk and targeted enhancement. Facial fat grafting effectively restores facial volume and symmetry, with stem cells aiding in tissue regeneration for long-term skin health. In essence, while the demand for aesthetic procedures continues to rise, there's a shift toward absorbable fillers like hyaluronic acid-based ones, favored for their safer outcomes. Evidence-based practices and ongoing research are crucial for ensuring the safety and efficacy of aesthetic procedures, ultimately enhancing patient outcomes and confidence.Level of Evidence V 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 .
使用填充剂进行软组织填充已在面部年轻化方面变得越来越流行,为皱纹、容量缺失和轮廓不规则问题提供了解决方案。诸如硅胶、聚丙烯酰胺水凝胶和聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯(PMMA)等不可生物降解的填充剂已被引入,有望带来持久效果。然而,关于硅胶填充剂使用的报告突出了一系列不良事件,从红斑和水肿到更严重的并发症,如感染、血管阻塞和炎性结节。不可吸收面部填充剂的不良反应甚至可能在术后数年出现,给患者带来极大不适和不满。因此,文献聚焦于针对这些后果的潜在治疗方法,包括全身使用抗生素、皮质类固醇注射、手术引流和切除。尽管有这些选择,但关于最佳治疗方式的共识仍然难以达成。手术切除是去除永久性填充剂的决定性方法,尽管存在切除后不规则的风险。脂肪移植已成为一种可行的解决方案,可用于纠正容量不足和不对称问题。利用患者自身组织,脂肪移植降低了不良反应和排斥的风险。它能有针对性地增加容量,恢复面部对称和比例,并通过干细胞的存在促进组织愈合和再生。在去除永久性填充剂后,不建议再次注射填充剂。在这种情况下,脂肪移植具有几个优点,包括风险降低和有针对性的增强效果。面部脂肪移植有效地恢复面部容量和对称性,干细胞有助于组织再生以实现长期皮肤健康。本质上,虽然美容手术的需求持续上升,但正朝着诸如基于透明质酸的可吸收填充剂转变,因其效果更安全而受到青睐。基于证据的实践和持续研究对于确保美容手术的安全性和有效性至关重要,最终可提高患者的治疗效果和信心。证据等级V 本刊要求作者为每篇文章指定证据等级。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 。