Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37154849›Full record

SynthesisAesthetic plastic surgery2023

Innovations in Skin and Soft Tissue Aging-A Systematic Literature Review and Market Analysis of Therapeutics and Associated Outcomes.

Sumun Khetpal, Durga Ghosh, Jason Roostaeian

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sumun Khetpal *Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, 200 Medical Plaza, Suite 460, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.
Durga Ghosh *Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, 200 Medical Plaza, Suite 460, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.
Jason RoostaeianDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, 200 Medical Plaza, Suite 460, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA. jasonroostaeian@mednet.ucla.edu.
University of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSkin and soft tissue aging has been an important topic of discussion among plastic surgeons and their patients. While botulinum toxin, facial fillers, chemical peels, and surgical lifts preside as the mainstay of treatment to restore appearance of youth, emergent technologies, such as CRISPR-Cas9, proteostasis, flap biology, and stem cell therapies, have gained traction in addressing the aging process of skin and soft tissue. Several studies have introduced these advancements, but it remains unclear how safe and effective these therapeutics are in facial rejuvenation, and how they may fit in the existent treatment workflow for soft tissue aging. MATERIALS/

methodsA systematic literature review was conducted to identify and assess therapeutics utilized in addressing skin and soft tissue aging. Variables collected included year of publication, journal, article title, organization of study, patient sample, treatment modality, associated outcomes. In addition, we performed a market analysis of companies involved in promoting technologies and therapeutics within this space. PitchBook (Seattle, WA), a public market database, was utilized to classify companies, and record the amount of venture capital funding allocated to these categories.

resultsInitial review yielded four hundred and two papers. Of these, thirty-five were extracted after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria. Though previous literature regards CRISPR-Cas9 technology as the most favorable anti-aging innovation, after reviewing the current literature, stem cell therapies utilizing recipient chimerism appeared to be the superior skin anti-aging technique when accounting for possible disadvantages of various techniques. The psychosocial and cosmetic outcomes from using cell therapy to modulate allograft survival and tolerance may confer more long-term proposed benefits than the technologies in CRISPR-Cas9, flap biology innovations, and autologous platelet-rich plasma use. Market analysis yielded a total of 87 companies, which promoted innovations in technology, biotechnology, biopharmaceuticals, cell-based therapies, and genetic therapy.

conclusionThis review provides physicians and patients with relevant, usable information regarding how therapeutics can impact treatment regimen for facial aesthetics and skin rejuvenation. Furthermore, the goal of this research is to elucidate the varying therapeutics to restore appearance of youth, present associated outcomes, and in doing so, present plastic surgeons and their colleagues with greater insight on the role of these therapeutics and technologies in clinical practice. Future studies can further assess the safety and efficacy of these innovations and discuss how these may fit within surgical plans among patients seeking rejuvenation procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: 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

Cosmetic TechniquesSkin AgingAdolescentAgingEstheticsFaceHumansRejuvenationAesthetic surgeryAgingBiotechnologyLongevity economyPharmaceuticals

Identifiers

PMID37154849
PMCPMC10390368
OpenAlexW4375955266

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.