ArticleIndian journal of dermatology
Detection of the Safe Zone for Upper Eyelid Hyaluronic Acid Injections.
Article in Indian journal of dermatology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strabismus surgery complicated by levator dehiscence.American journal of ophthalmology case reports · 2026Article
- Objective Assessment of Combined Orbital Fat Repositioning and Fat Grafting in Upper Eyelid Hollowing.Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 2026Article
- Complications of Periorbital Cosmetic Hyaluronic Acid Filler Injections: A Major ReviewTurkish journal of ophthalmology · 2025Review
- The Dual-plane Technique for Correcting Sunken Upper Eyelid Deformity with Hyaluronic Acid Filler Injections.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hyaluronic acid (HA) injections for upper eyelid volumisation are safe procedures with short downtime and low complication rates. Nevertheless, the upper eyelid is a high-risk area for vascular complications because of its rich vascular network. After injection, bruising, an indicator of vascular penetration, develops very often and prolongs the short downtime. Aims: To describe a pain-controlled withdrawal technique for minimizing vascular complications and to examine the effects of topical anaesthesia administered prior to injection on complications related to vascular penetration. Methods: HA was injected into the upper eyelids of 25 patients using the pain-controlled withdrawal technique without topical anaesthesia. The patients' median age, complication rates, average amount of HA administered, and follow-up periods were evaluated. In addition, the patients were asked to evaluate their pain during injection using a numerical pain rating scale. Results: The patients' mean age was 40.4 ± 7.3 years. Minimal eyelid edema developed in all patients but did not prevent any of the patients' social activities. No bruising was detected in any of the patients, and no major vascular complications, such as blindness or cerebrovascular events, developed. The average amount of HA administered was 1.43 ± 0.45 cc. All patients evaluated their pain during injection as mild. Conclusions: With the pain-controlled withdrawal technique, none of the patients had minor or major complications due to vascular penetration. The procedure was well tolerated by the patients. The detection of the safe injection zone allowed the administration of more than the standard/accepted 01 cc HA (up to 0.3 cc) from one point.
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.