Comparison of Intradermal Versus Microneedling-Assisted Botulinum A Toxin Injection for Enlarged Facial Pores: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q2 DERMATOLOGY
Fariba Iraji, Reza Moeini, Mahya Abedini, Marzieh Sadat Mousavi, Mina Saber, Mahmoud Reza Rahimi Barghani, Malihe Sagheb Ray Shirazi, Sarah Seyedyousefi
{"title":"Comparison of Intradermal Versus Microneedling-Assisted Botulinum A Toxin Injection for Enlarged Facial Pores: A Randomized Clinical Trial","authors":"Fariba Iraji,&nbsp;Reza Moeini,&nbsp;Mahya Abedini,&nbsp;Marzieh Sadat Mousavi,&nbsp;Mina Saber,&nbsp;Mahmoud Reza Rahimi Barghani,&nbsp;Malihe Sagheb Ray Shirazi,&nbsp;Sarah Seyedyousefi","doi":"10.1111/jocd.70114","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Enlarged facial pores are a prevalent cosmetic concern affecting many individuals. Traditional treatments include topical agents and laser therapies, but recent advancements have introduced intradermal and microneedling-assisted Botulinum toxin type A (BoNTA) injections as promising alternatives. This study aims to compare the efficacy of these two methods in reducing the size of enlarged facial pores.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This randomized clinical trial was conducted at a referral centre in Iran. Thirty patients aged 25–60 years with enlarged facial pores were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive intradermal BoNTA injections on one side of the face and microneedling-assisted BoNTA injections on the other side. Dermoscopic evaluation and physical examination were performed at baseline and 1-month post-treatment. Improvement in pore size was assessed by three blinded dermatologists using the Quartile Improvement Scale (QIS), and patient satisfaction was measured using the Likert scale.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The average age of participants was 34.2 years, with 29 females and one male. Dermoscopic and physical examination scores showed no significant difference between the two treatment modalities for both cheek and nose areas (<i>p</i> &gt; 0.05). Patient satisfaction scores were also comparable between the two sides (<i>p</i> = 0.13). Both treatments effectively reduced pore size, but no statistically significant difference was observed between intradermal and microneedling-assisted BoNTA injections.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Both intradermal and microneedling-assisted BoNTA injections are effective in treating enlarged facial pores, with no significant difference in efficacy. These findings provide flexibility for dermatologists in selecting the appropriate treatment method based on patient preferences and clinical considerations.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15546,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology","volume":"24 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jocd.70114","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jocd.70114","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Enlarged facial pores are a prevalent cosmetic concern affecting many individuals. Traditional treatments include topical agents and laser therapies, but recent advancements have introduced intradermal and microneedling-assisted Botulinum toxin type A (BoNTA) injections as promising alternatives. This study aims to compare the efficacy of these two methods in reducing the size of enlarged facial pores.

Methods

This randomized clinical trial was conducted at a referral centre in Iran. Thirty patients aged 25–60 years with enlarged facial pores were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive intradermal BoNTA injections on one side of the face and microneedling-assisted BoNTA injections on the other side. Dermoscopic evaluation and physical examination were performed at baseline and 1-month post-treatment. Improvement in pore size was assessed by three blinded dermatologists using the Quartile Improvement Scale (QIS), and patient satisfaction was measured using the Likert scale.

Results

The average age of participants was 34.2 years, with 29 females and one male. Dermoscopic and physical examination scores showed no significant difference between the two treatment modalities for both cheek and nose areas (p > 0.05). Patient satisfaction scores were also comparable between the two sides (p = 0.13). Both treatments effectively reduced pore size, but no statistically significant difference was observed between intradermal and microneedling-assisted BoNTA injections.

Conclusion

Both intradermal and microneedling-assisted BoNTA injections are effective in treating enlarged facial pores, with no significant difference in efficacy. These findings provide flexibility for dermatologists in selecting the appropriate treatment method based on patient preferences and clinical considerations.

皮内注射与微针辅助肉毒杆菌A毒素治疗面部毛孔肿大的比较:一项随机临床试验
面部毛孔粗大是影响许多人的普遍美容问题。传统的治疗方法包括局部药物和激光治疗,但最近的进展已经引入了皮内和微针辅助的A型肉毒杆菌毒素(BoNTA)注射作为有希望的替代方法。本研究旨在比较这两种方法在缩小面部毛孔粗大方面的效果。方法本随机临床试验在伊朗一家转诊中心进行。30例年龄在25-60岁的面部毛孔肿大的患者入组。患者被随机分配到一侧面部皮内注射BoNTA,另一侧接受微针辅助BoNTA注射。在基线和治疗后1个月进行皮肤镜评估和体格检查。毛孔大小的改善由三位盲法皮肤科医生使用四分位改善量表(QIS)进行评估,患者满意度使用李克特量表进行测量。结果参与者平均年龄34.2岁,女性29人,男性1人。两种治疗方式在脸颊和鼻子部位的皮肤镜和体格检查评分差异无统计学意义(p > 0.05)。两组患者满意度评分也具有可比性(p = 0.13)。两种治疗方法均有效减小了毛孔大小,但皮内注射和微针辅助BoNTA注射之间无统计学差异。结论皮内注射与微针辅助注射BoNTA治疗面部毛孔粗大均有效,两种方法疗效无显著性差异。这些发现为皮肤科医生根据患者偏好和临床考虑选择合适的治疗方法提供了灵活性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
13.00%
发文量
818
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology publishes high quality, peer-reviewed articles on all aspects of cosmetic dermatology with the aim to foster the highest standards of patient care in cosmetic dermatology. Published quarterly, the Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology facilitates continuing professional development and provides a forum for the exchange of scientific research and innovative techniques. The scope of coverage includes, but will not be limited to: healthy skin; skin maintenance; ageing skin; photodamage and photoprotection; rejuvenation; biochemistry, endocrinology and neuroimmunology of healthy skin; imaging; skin measurement; quality of life; skin types; sensitive skin; rosacea and acne; sebum; sweat; fat; phlebology; hair conservation, restoration and removal; nails and nail surgery; pigment; psychological and medicolegal issues; retinoids; cosmetic chemistry; dermopharmacy; cosmeceuticals; toiletries; striae; cellulite; cosmetic dermatological surgery; blepharoplasty; liposuction; surgical complications; botulinum; fillers, peels and dermabrasion; local and tumescent anaesthesia; electrosurgery; lasers, including laser physics, laser research and safety, vascular lasers, pigment lasers, hair removal lasers, tattoo removal lasers, resurfacing lasers, dermal remodelling lasers and laser complications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信