一项前瞻性、随机、双盲、分面比较研究,评估 DKL23 和 Juvéderm Volift 矫正中重度鼻唇沟的有效性和安全性。

IF 3 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Aesthetic Surgery Journal Pub Date : 2024-10-15 DOI:10.1093/asj/sjae133
Mohammad Alimohammadi, Sharon Furman-Assaf, Johan Nilsson
{"title":"一项前瞻性、随机、双盲、分面比较研究,评估 DKL23 和 Juvéderm Volift 矫正中重度鼻唇沟的有效性和安全性。","authors":"Mohammad Alimohammadi, Sharon Furman-Assaf, Johan Nilsson","doi":"10.1093/asj/sjae133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hyaluronic acid dermal fillers are used for multiple indications, including wrinkle correction and restoration of volume/fullness.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of 2 hyaluronic acid products for correcting moderate to severe nasolabial folds (NLFs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective, randomized, double-blind, split-face study was undertaken. The subjects' left and right NLFs were randomly allocated for treatment with DKL23 or Juvéderm Volift. Follow-up was conducted at 1, 3, 6, and 9 months. The changes from baseline on the Wrinkle Severity Rating Scale and the Global Aesthetics Improvement Scale were evaluated. Posttreatment adverse events (AEs) were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-eight women (median age, 57.0 years) with Type I to VI skin were enrolled. Both treatments showed statistically significant improvement (P < .0001) in NLFs according to the Wrinkle Severity Rating Scale score from baseline to each of the time points assessed. The improvement in NLFs was maintained until the end of the study (9 months). Furthermore, the change from baseline to each of the time points assessed was similar between DKL23 and Juvéderm Volift. Investigator- and subject-rated Global Aesthetics Improvement Scale scores showed similar rates of improvement (indicated by the sum of responses of improved, much improved, or very much improved) between the 2 products. The AEs reported in the study were in line with previous and expected experience after injection of hyaluronic acid dermal fillers. The types of AEs, their rates, intensity, and duration were comparable between the 2 products.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>DKL23 improved NLF severity from baseline and for up to 9 months, and the results were comparable to the improvement shown by Juvéderm Volift. Treatment was safe and well tolerated.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 2: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":7728,"journal":{"name":"Aesthetic Surgery Journal","volume":" ","pages":"1218-1226"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11474605/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Split-Face, Comparative Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of DKL23 and Juvéderm Volift for Correcting Moderate-to-Severe Nasolabial Folds.\",\"authors\":\"Mohammad Alimohammadi, Sharon Furman-Assaf, Johan Nilsson\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/asj/sjae133\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hyaluronic acid dermal fillers are used for multiple indications, including wrinkle correction and restoration of volume/fullness.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of 2 hyaluronic acid products for correcting moderate to severe nasolabial folds (NLFs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective, randomized, double-blind, split-face study was undertaken. The subjects' left and right NLFs were randomly allocated for treatment with DKL23 or Juvéderm Volift. Follow-up was conducted at 1, 3, 6, and 9 months. The changes from baseline on the Wrinkle Severity Rating Scale and the Global Aesthetics Improvement Scale were evaluated. Posttreatment adverse events (AEs) were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-eight women (median age, 57.0 years) with Type I to VI skin were enrolled. Both treatments showed statistically significant improvement (P < .0001) in NLFs according to the Wrinkle Severity Rating Scale score from baseline to each of the time points assessed. The improvement in NLFs was maintained until the end of the study (9 months). Furthermore, the change from baseline to each of the time points assessed was similar between DKL23 and Juvéderm Volift. Investigator- and subject-rated Global Aesthetics Improvement Scale scores showed similar rates of improvement (indicated by the sum of responses of improved, much improved, or very much improved) between the 2 products. The AEs reported in the study were in line with previous and expected experience after injection of hyaluronic acid dermal fillers. The types of AEs, their rates, intensity, and duration were comparable between the 2 products.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>DKL23 improved NLF severity from baseline and for up to 9 months, and the results were comparable to the improvement shown by Juvéderm Volift. Treatment was safe and well tolerated.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 2: </strong></p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7728,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aesthetic Surgery Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1218-1226\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11474605/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aesthetic Surgery Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjae133\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aesthetic Surgery Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjae133","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

摘要

背景:透明质酸皮肤填充剂用于多种适应症,包括皱纹矫正和恢复体积/丰满:透明质酸皮肤填充剂可用于多种适应症,包括皱纹矫正和恢复体积/丰满度:比较两种玻尿酸产品在矫正中度至重度鼻唇沟皱纹方面的有效性和安全性:方法:前瞻性随机双盲分脸研究。受试者的左右鼻唇沟分别随机接受 DKL23 和 Juvéderm Volift 的治疗。分别在 1、3、6 和 9 个月时进行随访。评估了皱纹严重程度评分量表(WSRS)和整体美学改善量表(GAIS)与基线相比的变化。记录了治疗后的不良反应(AEs):48 名女性(中位年龄为 57.0 岁)的皮肤类型为 I-VI 型。两种治疗方法均显示出统计学意义上的显著改善(p结论:DKL23 可改善 NLF:DKL23 可改善 NLF 的严重程度,与 Juvéderm Volift 的改善效果相当。治疗安全且耐受性良好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Split-Face, Comparative Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of DKL23 and Juvéderm Volift for Correcting Moderate-to-Severe Nasolabial Folds.

Background: Hyaluronic acid dermal fillers are used for multiple indications, including wrinkle correction and restoration of volume/fullness.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of 2 hyaluronic acid products for correcting moderate to severe nasolabial folds (NLFs).

Methods: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, split-face study was undertaken. The subjects' left and right NLFs were randomly allocated for treatment with DKL23 or Juvéderm Volift. Follow-up was conducted at 1, 3, 6, and 9 months. The changes from baseline on the Wrinkle Severity Rating Scale and the Global Aesthetics Improvement Scale were evaluated. Posttreatment adverse events (AEs) were recorded.

Results: Forty-eight women (median age, 57.0 years) with Type I to VI skin were enrolled. Both treatments showed statistically significant improvement (P < .0001) in NLFs according to the Wrinkle Severity Rating Scale score from baseline to each of the time points assessed. The improvement in NLFs was maintained until the end of the study (9 months). Furthermore, the change from baseline to each of the time points assessed was similar between DKL23 and Juvéderm Volift. Investigator- and subject-rated Global Aesthetics Improvement Scale scores showed similar rates of improvement (indicated by the sum of responses of improved, much improved, or very much improved) between the 2 products. The AEs reported in the study were in line with previous and expected experience after injection of hyaluronic acid dermal fillers. The types of AEs, their rates, intensity, and duration were comparable between the 2 products.

Conclusions: DKL23 improved NLF severity from baseline and for up to 9 months, and the results were comparable to the improvement shown by Juvéderm Volift. Treatment was safe and well tolerated.

Level of evidence: 2:

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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.
期刊最新文献
Pectoralis Major Muscle 3D Volumetric Reconstruction in the Tuberous Breast: Anatomical and Radiomics Differences With Potential Surgical Impact. NivobotulinumtoxinA in the Treatment of Glabellar Lines With or Without Concurrent Treatment of Lateral Canthal Lines in Two Phase 3 Clinical Trials. Efficacy and Safety of RelabotulinumtoxinA, a New Ready-to-Use Liquid Formulation Botulinum Toxin: Results From the READY-1 Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Phase 3 Trial in Glabellar Lines. IL-9 Is a Biomarker of BIA-ALCL Detected Rapidly by Lateral Flow Assay. Long-term Implications of Cosmetic Breast Surgeries on Subsequent Breast Reconstruction.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1