Randomized, Evaluator‐Blind, Split‐Face Comparison Study of Single Cross‐linked versus Double Cross‐linked Hyaluronic Acid in the Treatment of Glabellar Lines

BACKGROUND At present, various hyaluronic acids are being used to rejuvenate facial skin. There is no comparative study of single cross‐linked hyaluronic acid (SCHA) versus double cross‐linked hyaluronic acid (DCHA). The objective of our study is to compare the effectiveness and complications of SCH...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Dermatologic surgery 2008-06, Vol.34 (s1), p.S25-S30
Main Authors: KONO, TARO, KINNEY, BRIAN M., GROFF, WILLIAM FREDERICK, CHAN, HENRY H., ERCOCEN, ALI RIZA, NOZAKI, MOTOHIRO
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aged
Biocompatible Materials - administration & dosage
Biocompatible Materials - chemistry
Cosmetic Techniques
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Forehead
Humans
Hyaluronic Acid - administration & dosage
Hyaluronic Acid - analogs & derivatives
Hyaluronic Acid - chemistry
Injections, Intradermal
Single-Blind Method
Skin Aging
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:BACKGROUND At present, various hyaluronic acids are being used to rejuvenate facial skin. There is no comparative study of single cross‐linked hyaluronic acid (SCHA) versus double cross‐linked hyaluronic acid (DCHA). The objective of our study is to compare the effectiveness and complications of SCHA versus DCHA in the treatment of glabellar lines. METHODS Ten female patients were enrolled in this randomized, evaluator‐blind study. One side (left vs. right) of each patient's glabellar lines was treated with SCHA and the other side was treated with DCHA. Two independent blinded observers reviewed the clinical photographs at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after the treatment and assessed for degree of improvement as well as complications. RESULTS The two products were equally effective in producing an optimal cosmetic result, although at 6, 9, and 12 months posttreatment, a higher proportion of patients showed over 50% improvement with DCHA than with SCHA. At 12 months posttreatment, DCHA was considered superior in 70% of patients, whereas SCHA was superior in 10% of patients. CONCLUSIONS Both SCHA and DCHA are equally effective in producing an optimal cosmetic result. DCHA provides a more durable esthetic improvement when compared to SCHA in the treatment of glabellar lines.
ISSN:1076-0512
1524-4725
DOI:10.1111/j.1524-4725.2008.34239.x