Trial reportAesthetic plastic surgery2021
A Single-Center, Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trial to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of a New Monophasic Hyaluronic Acid Filler and Biphasic Filler in Correcting Nasolabial Fold.
Trial report in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and Potential Complications of Facial Wrinkle Correction with Dermal Fillers: A Systematic Literature Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Pooled it
- Hyaluronic Acid: A Powerful Biomolecule with Wide-Ranging Applications-A Comprehensive Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHyaluronic acid (HA) fillers have been widely used in humans since 1958 because of their biomedical safety. Restylane
methodsWe enrolled 96 participants with visible NLFs in this randomized, double-blind, single-center clinical study. Participants were injected with a new MHA filler in one NLF and a BHA filler and were reassessed for cosmetic changes at 8 and 24 weeks. Wrinkle severity was assessed using the 5-point WSRS.
resultsAt week 24, the mean improvement in WSRS compared to baseline was 1.92 ± 0.75 and 2.24 ± 0.66 for MHA and BHA fillers, respectively, and corresponding average pain values using the VAS score 30 min after the procedure were 0.04 ± 0.25 and 0.02 ± 0.15, respectively, showing no significant difference. Average GAIS values 8 weeks after the procedure with MHA and BHA fillers were 1.89 ± 0.77 and 1.40 ± 0.82, respectively (p < 0.001). Both fillers were well tolerated, with mild adverse reactions.
conclusionThe evaluation of the effect of Sardenyashape LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.