Lee Smith, Masoud Rahmati, Damiano Pizzol, Guillermo Felipe López-Sánchez, Laurent Boyer, Guillaume Fond, Bach Xuan Tran, Julia Gawronska, Dong Keon Yon, Roshan Ravindran
{"title":"Biostimulants in Aesthetic Medicine: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Efficacy, Safety, and Patient Satisfaction.","authors":"Lee Smith, Masoud Rahmati, Damiano Pizzol, Guillermo Felipe López-Sánchez, Laurent Boyer, Guillaume Fond, Bach Xuan Tran, Julia Gawronska, Dong Keon Yon, Roshan Ravindran","doi":"10.1093/asj/sjaf142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Biostimulants, including calcium hydroxyapatite (CaHA), poly-L-lactic acid (PLLA), and polycaprolactone (PCL), have become popular in aesthetic medicine as they lead to long-term tissue rejuvenation. However, their efficacy (e.g. dermal, volume, and anatomic outcomes), satisfaction and safety remain unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis collates and appraises the available data on biostimulants, examining their efficacy, adverse events and patient satisfaction. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed/Medline (National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD), Scopus (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands), Embase (Elsevier), and Web of Science (Clarivate, Philadelpha, PA, USA), up to January 14th, 2025. Studies were included that assessed the effects of biostimulants on efficacy, adverse events and patient satisfaction in observational studies. Meta-analyses using random-effects models were performed on individual proportions and applied to seven outcomes (satisfaction, bruising, ecchymosis, edema, erythema, nodules development, pain). A total of 197 articles were screened, and 25 studies were included in the systematic review. The results of meta-analyses indicate that the pooled satisfaction rate of biostimulants was estimated at 91% (95% CI: 67-98, I2= 87.3%); bruising 27% (95% CI: 12-50, I2= 96%), ecchymosis 22%; (95% CI: 11-40, I2= 95.5%), edema 5%; (95% CI: 1-18, I2= 93.6%), erythema 16% (95% CI: 4-47, I2= 94.3%), nodules development 5% (95% CI: 2-10, I2= 85.5%), pain 92% (95% CI: 63-99, I2= 87.7%,). Among studies not included in the meta-analysis all parameters studied showed significant improvements in terms of dermal, volume, anatomic and satisfaction outcomes. Biostimulants demonstrate clinical promise and a favourable tolerability profile in aesthetic medicine, despite the common occurrence of minor adverse events, most notably pain.</p>","PeriodicalId":7728,"journal":{"name":"Aesthetic Surgery Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aesthetic Surgery Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjaf142","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Biostimulants, including calcium hydroxyapatite (CaHA), poly-L-lactic acid (PLLA), and polycaprolactone (PCL), have become popular in aesthetic medicine as they lead to long-term tissue rejuvenation. However, their efficacy (e.g. dermal, volume, and anatomic outcomes), satisfaction and safety remain unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis collates and appraises the available data on biostimulants, examining their efficacy, adverse events and patient satisfaction. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed/Medline (National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD), Scopus (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands), Embase (Elsevier), and Web of Science (Clarivate, Philadelpha, PA, USA), up to January 14th, 2025. Studies were included that assessed the effects of biostimulants on efficacy, adverse events and patient satisfaction in observational studies. Meta-analyses using random-effects models were performed on individual proportions and applied to seven outcomes (satisfaction, bruising, ecchymosis, edema, erythema, nodules development, pain). A total of 197 articles were screened, and 25 studies were included in the systematic review. The results of meta-analyses indicate that the pooled satisfaction rate of biostimulants was estimated at 91% (95% CI: 67-98, I2= 87.3%); bruising 27% (95% CI: 12-50, I2= 96%), ecchymosis 22%; (95% CI: 11-40, I2= 95.5%), edema 5%; (95% CI: 1-18, I2= 93.6%), erythema 16% (95% CI: 4-47, I2= 94.3%), nodules development 5% (95% CI: 2-10, I2= 85.5%), pain 92% (95% CI: 63-99, I2= 87.7%,). Among studies not included in the meta-analysis all parameters studied showed significant improvements in terms of dermal, volume, anatomic and satisfaction outcomes. Biostimulants demonstrate clinical promise and a favourable tolerability profile in aesthetic medicine, despite the common occurrence of minor adverse events, most notably pain.
期刊介绍:
Aesthetic Surgery Journal is a peer-reviewed international journal focusing on scientific developments and clinical techniques in aesthetic surgery. The official publication of The Aesthetic Society, ASJ is also the official English-language journal of many major international societies of plastic, aesthetic and reconstructive surgery representing South America, Central America, Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. It is also the official journal of the British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons, the Canadian Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery and The Rhinoplasty Society.