We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Prospective, Split-Face, Randomized, Long-Term Blinded Objective Comparison of the Performance and Tolerability of Two New Hyaluronic Acid Fillers.
Dermatologic Surgery : Official Publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et Al.] 2017 December
BACKGROUND: There are requirements for long-term, objective comparisons of hyaluronic acid (HA) dermal fillers.
OBJECTIVE: To compare efficacy and tolerability of ART FILLER Universal (AFU) and ART FILLER Fine lines (AFFL) with the existing HA fillers for the treatment of nasolabial folds and crow's feet.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective, randomized, rater- and patient-blind, split-face comparison of AFU with JUVEDERM Ultra 3 (JUV) and AFFL with FIRST LINES PureSense (FLPS). The severity of nasolabial folds and crow's feet was assessed by independent blinded evaluators using the Lemperle scale at baseline, day (D) 30/D45, D90, and D180. Tolerability, Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS), wrinkle volumes, and skin thickness and density were also measured at D30/D45, D90, and D180.
RESULTS: At D30 and D180 respectively, 61 and 57 patients were assessed. Scores for nasolabial folds and crow's feet showed statistically significant improvements at D30, D90, and D180. AFU and AFFL were noninferior to JUV and FLPS, respectively. Most patients showed GAIS improvements, maintained until at least D180 and significant increases of collagen synthesis in crow's feet and nasolabial folds. Treatments were well tolerated.
CONCLUSION: AFU and AFFL are noninferior to comparators. The methodology used represents a novel approach to augment existing clinical assessment of HA fillers.
OBJECTIVE: To compare efficacy and tolerability of ART FILLER Universal (AFU) and ART FILLER Fine lines (AFFL) with the existing HA fillers for the treatment of nasolabial folds and crow's feet.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective, randomized, rater- and patient-blind, split-face comparison of AFU with JUVEDERM Ultra 3 (JUV) and AFFL with FIRST LINES PureSense (FLPS). The severity of nasolabial folds and crow's feet was assessed by independent blinded evaluators using the Lemperle scale at baseline, day (D) 30/D45, D90, and D180. Tolerability, Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS), wrinkle volumes, and skin thickness and density were also measured at D30/D45, D90, and D180.
RESULTS: At D30 and D180 respectively, 61 and 57 patients were assessed. Scores for nasolabial folds and crow's feet showed statistically significant improvements at D30, D90, and D180. AFU and AFFL were noninferior to JUV and FLPS, respectively. Most patients showed GAIS improvements, maintained until at least D180 and significant increases of collagen synthesis in crow's feet and nasolabial folds. Treatments were well tolerated.
CONCLUSION: AFU and AFFL are noninferior to comparators. The methodology used represents a novel approach to augment existing clinical assessment of HA fillers.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app