We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
A randomized, split-face, histomorphologic study comparing a volumetric calcium hydroxylapatite and a hyaluronic acid-based dermal filler.
Journal of Drugs in Dermatology : JDD 2014 September
BACKGROUND: Soft-tissue augmentation with fillers is an aesthetic procedure for restoring age-related volume loss.
OBJECTIVE: To compare neocollagenesis and elastin production stimulated by Radiesse® (calcium hydroxylapatite; CaHA, Merz Pharmaceuticals GmbH) and a hyaluronic acid-based filler (HA; Juvéderm® VOLUMA®).
METHODS: Twenty-four women, aged 35-45, participated in this split-face, comparative study. Punch biopsies were taken 4 and 9 months after supraperiostal injection of each filler into the ipsilateral or contralateral postauricular area. Samples were analyzed for collagens type I and III, elastin, Ki-67, and inflammatory and angiogenic markers.
RESULTS: At month 4, collagen type III was greater with CaHA vs HA (P=0.0052). By month 9, type I staining was higher with CaHA vs HA (P=0.0135), whereas type III was lower with CaHA than HA (P=0.0019). Staining for elastin, Ki-67 and angiogenesis was greatest with CaHA at both timepoints. Inflammatory markers increased most with HA treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: CaHA resulted in more active, physiologic remodeling of the extracellular matrix than HA by stimulating a two-step process whereby collagen type I gradually replaced type III. Increased elastin stimulated by CaHA also indicates active remodeling. The results of this study suggest that, in the first 9 months after treatment, by reconstituting tissue homeostasis without inducing inflammation suggests CaHA has more desirable characteristics for a dermal filler than HA.
OBJECTIVE: To compare neocollagenesis and elastin production stimulated by Radiesse® (calcium hydroxylapatite; CaHA, Merz Pharmaceuticals GmbH) and a hyaluronic acid-based filler (HA; Juvéderm® VOLUMA®).
METHODS: Twenty-four women, aged 35-45, participated in this split-face, comparative study. Punch biopsies were taken 4 and 9 months after supraperiostal injection of each filler into the ipsilateral or contralateral postauricular area. Samples were analyzed for collagens type I and III, elastin, Ki-67, and inflammatory and angiogenic markers.
RESULTS: At month 4, collagen type III was greater with CaHA vs HA (P=0.0052). By month 9, type I staining was higher with CaHA vs HA (P=0.0135), whereas type III was lower with CaHA than HA (P=0.0019). Staining for elastin, Ki-67 and angiogenesis was greatest with CaHA at both timepoints. Inflammatory markers increased most with HA treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: CaHA resulted in more active, physiologic remodeling of the extracellular matrix than HA by stimulating a two-step process whereby collagen type I gradually replaced type III. Increased elastin stimulated by CaHA also indicates active remodeling. The results of this study suggest that, in the first 9 months after treatment, by reconstituting tissue homeostasis without inducing inflammation suggests CaHA has more desirable characteristics for a dermal filler than HA.
Full text links
Related Resources
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