Efficacy and Safety of Intradermal Versus Subdermal Injection of Polynucleotide for Facial Improvement: A Prospective Split-Face Study

IF 3.5 4区医学 Q2 DERMATOLOGY

Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology Pub Date : 2026-08-04 DOI:10.1111/jocd.71108

Hyungkyu Bae, Soo-Bin Kim, Yu-Ran Heo, Hyoun Jun Park, Jong Seo Kim, Nark-Kyoung Rho, Hee-Jin Kim

{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Intradermal Versus Subdermal Injection of Polynucleotide for Facial Improvement: A Prospective Split-Face Study","authors":"Hyungkyu Bae, Soo-Bin Kim, Yu-Ran Heo, Hyoun Jun Park, Jong Seo Kim, Nark-Kyoung Rho, Hee-Jin Kim","doi":"10.1111/jocd.71108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Polynucleotide-based injectables are increasingly used to improve periocular and midface skin quality, but the optimal delivery approach remains uncertain. Because intradermal and subdermal administration differ in tissue placement and short-term procedure-related reactions, clarifying whether subdermal delivery can achieve comparable objective improvement with better tolerability is clinically relevant.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims</h3>\n \n <p>This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of intradermal versus subdermal delivery of polynucleotide for facial skin improvement using a prospective split-face clinical design.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patients/Methods</h3>\n \n <p>In this prospective split-face study, adults seeking facial wrinkle improvement received three treatment sessions at 3-week intervals. The left cheek received intradermal injection and the right cheek received subdermal delivery. The primary endpoint was percentage improvement from baseline to Week 12 in the Antera 3D fineline index. A prespecified non-inferiority margin of −15% (SD − ID) was evaluated using baseline-adjusted linear mixed-effects modeling. Secondary objective outcomes included additional Antera 3D skin-quality indices and skin elasticity (Cutometer R2). GAIS, post-procedure pain (VAS), injection-site embossing, and adverse events were recorded.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Forty participants received at least one treatment, and 37 contributed imaging-based efficacy data. Both approaches improved wrinkle- and texture-related parameters from baseline. Subdermal delivery met the non-inferiority criterion for fineline improvement at Week 12 and also showed non-inferior results at Week 9. At Week 12, the fineline index was lower on the subdermal side than on the intradermal side. Subdermal delivery was associated with lower pain scores at all sessions and no injection-site embossing.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Subdermal delivery was non-inferior to intradermal injection for objective skin-quality outcomes and demonstrated a more favorable tolerability profile.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15546,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology","volume":"25 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jocd.71108","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jocd.71108","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

Polynucleotide-based injectables are increasingly used to improve periocular and midface skin quality, but the optimal delivery approach remains uncertain. Because intradermal and subdermal administration differ in tissue placement and short-term procedure-related reactions, clarifying whether subdermal delivery can achieve comparable objective improvement with better tolerability is clinically relevant.

Aims

This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of intradermal versus subdermal delivery of polynucleotide for facial skin improvement using a prospective split-face clinical design.

Patients/Methods

In this prospective split-face study, adults seeking facial wrinkle improvement received three treatment sessions at 3-week intervals. The left cheek received intradermal injection and the right cheek received subdermal delivery. The primary endpoint was percentage improvement from baseline to Week 12 in the Antera 3D fineline index. A prespecified non-inferiority margin of −15% (SD − ID) was evaluated using baseline-adjusted linear mixed-effects modeling. Secondary objective outcomes included additional Antera 3D skin-quality indices and skin elasticity (Cutometer R2). GAIS, post-procedure pain (VAS), injection-site embossing, and adverse events were recorded.

Results

Forty participants received at least one treatment, and 37 contributed imaging-based efficacy data. Both approaches improved wrinkle- and texture-related parameters from baseline. Subdermal delivery met the non-inferiority criterion for fineline improvement at Week 12 and also showed non-inferior results at Week 9. At Week 12, the fineline index was lower on the subdermal side than on the intradermal side. Subdermal delivery was associated with lower pain scores at all sessions and no injection-site embossing.

Conclusions

Subdermal delivery was non-inferior to intradermal injection for objective skin-quality outcomes and demonstrated a more favorable tolerability profile.

查看原文本刊更多论文

皮内注射与皮下注射多核苷酸改善面部的有效性和安全性：一项前瞻性裂脸研究

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

Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology DERMATOLOGY-

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.