Multicenter, Randomized Split-Face Trial of a Crosslinked Hyaluronic Acid Filler With Lidocaine for Nasolabial Fold Correction.

IF 3 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Konstantin Frank, Jeanine Downie, Michael Gold, John Joseph, Jeremy Green, Sabrina Fabi, David Bank, Joel L Cohen, Ava Shamban, Robert Weiss, Alice Krames-Juerss, Gary Monheit
{"title":"Multicenter, Randomized Split-Face Trial of a Crosslinked Hyaluronic Acid Filler With Lidocaine for Nasolabial Fold Correction.","authors":"Konstantin Frank, Jeanine Downie, Michael Gold, John Joseph, Jeremy Green, Sabrina Fabi, David Bank, Joel L Cohen, Ava Shamban, Robert Weiss, Alice Krames-Juerss, Gary Monheit","doi":"10.1093/asj/sjaf137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nasolabial folds (NLFs) are common age-related facial lines, often treated with dermal fillers. Princess® FILLER Lidocaine (PFL; now saypha® filler Lidocaine) and Juvéderm® Ultra XC (JUXC) are both hyaluronic acid-based fillers used for this purpose.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of PFL in reducing NLF severity compared to JUXC using a split-face study design.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this randomized, subject- and investigator-blinded multicenter study, subjects with moderate to severe NLFs received PFL on one side of the face and JUXC on the other. Baseline NLF severity was assessed using the 5-point Nasolabial Fold Severity Rating Scale (NLF-SRS). Follow-up assessments occurred at weeks 12, 24, 36, and/or 48. The primary endpoint was the proportion of NLF-SRS responders at week 24. Secondary endpoints included assessments by photographic reviewers and treating investigators, along with Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) ratings. Safety was monitored via adverse event reporting and subject diaries. FACE-Q questionnaires evaluated subject satisfaction. Repeat treatment was permitted at week 36 or 48 if needed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At week 24, PFL demonstrated non-inferiority to JUXC (82.2% vs. 81.9% responders; difference 0.37%, p < 0.0001). Secondary assessments confirmed this finding. Adverse events occurred in 24.4% of subjects post-PFL, with most being mild to moderate. Serious TEAEs were rare (1.1%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PFL is a non-inferior alternative to JUXC for treating moderate to severe NLFs, with comparable efficacy, safety, and patient satisfaction.</p>","PeriodicalId":7728,"journal":{"name":"Aesthetic Surgery Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","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/sjaf137","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

Background: Nasolabial folds (NLFs) are common age-related facial lines, often treated with dermal fillers. Princess® FILLER Lidocaine (PFL; now saypha® filler Lidocaine) and Juvéderm® Ultra XC (JUXC) are both hyaluronic acid-based fillers used for this purpose.

Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of PFL in reducing NLF severity compared to JUXC using a split-face study design.

Methods: In this randomized, subject- and investigator-blinded multicenter study, subjects with moderate to severe NLFs received PFL on one side of the face and JUXC on the other. Baseline NLF severity was assessed using the 5-point Nasolabial Fold Severity Rating Scale (NLF-SRS). Follow-up assessments occurred at weeks 12, 24, 36, and/or 48. The primary endpoint was the proportion of NLF-SRS responders at week 24. Secondary endpoints included assessments by photographic reviewers and treating investigators, along with Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) ratings. Safety was monitored via adverse event reporting and subject diaries. FACE-Q questionnaires evaluated subject satisfaction. Repeat treatment was permitted at week 36 or 48 if needed.

Results: At week 24, PFL demonstrated non-inferiority to JUXC (82.2% vs. 81.9% responders; difference 0.37%, p < 0.0001). Secondary assessments confirmed this finding. Adverse events occurred in 24.4% of subjects post-PFL, with most being mild to moderate. Serious TEAEs were rare (1.1%).

Conclusions: PFL is a non-inferior alternative to JUXC for treating moderate to severe NLFs, with comparable efficacy, safety, and patient satisfaction.

交联透明质酸填充剂与利多卡因用于鼻唇沟矫正的多中心、随机裂面试验。
背景:鼻唇褶皱是常见的与年龄相关的面部皱纹,通常用真皮填充物治疗。Princess®FILLER利多卡因(PFL;现在saypha®填充利多卡因)和juvsamuderm®Ultra XC(近c)都是用于此目的的透明质酸填充剂。目的:采用裂面研究设计,评价PFL在减轻NLF严重程度方面的有效性和安全性。方法:在这项随机、受试者和研究者双盲的多中心研究中,中度至重度NLFs患者在一侧面部接受PFL,另一侧面部接受近置化疗。使用5点鼻唇襞严重程度评定量表(NLF- srs)评估基线NLF严重程度。随访评估发生在第12、24、36和/或48周。主要终点是第24周NLF-SRS应答者的比例。次要终点包括摄影审稿人和治疗研究者的评估,以及全球审美改善量表(GAIS)评分。通过不良事件报告和受试者日记监测安全性。FACE-Q问卷评估受试者满意度。如果需要,在第36周或第48周允许重复治疗。结果:在第24周,PFL显示出对jiox的非劣效性(82.2%对81.9%的应答者;差异0.37%,p < 0.0001)。二次评估证实了这一发现。不良事件发生率为24.4%,多数为轻至中度。严重teae罕见(1.1%)。结论:PFL是治疗中至重度NLFs的非劣选方案,具有相当的疗效、安全性和患者满意度。
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
6.20
自引率
20.70%
发文量
309
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
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.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信