Trial reportAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Comparative Trial Evaluating a High- Versus Low-Integration Hyaluronic Acid Filler for Contouring the Jawline.
Trial report in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ultrasound imaging in aesthetic medicine: safety and precision in injectable procedures.Journal of ultrasound · 2026Review
- Rheological and Structural Analysis of Hyaluronic Acid Fillers Used for Chin Augmentation.Dermatology and therapy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundContour deficits of the jawline are an area of concern for many aesthetic patients. While the use of hyaluronic acid (HA) for jawline enhancement has been described previously, comparative investigations of HA fillers manufactured with different technologies are limited. Therefore, the aim of the current investigation was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Restylane Lyft (HA-L) and Restylane Defyne (HA-D) for contouring of the jawline.
methodsThis prospective clinical trial enrolled forty (40) participants. Twenty (20) participants with thin skin were treated with HA-D, and twenty (20) participants with thick skin were treated with HA-L. Visits occurred at Screening/Baseline (treatment), Week 2 (touch-up), and Months 1, 3, and 6. At each visit, a blinded evaluator rated 3-dimensional participant imagery according to the Jawline Volume Loss Scale and participants completed the Jawline Subject Satisfaction Scale. Frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events was collected via participant diaries, and product integration characteristics were evaluated via ultrasound.
resultsChi-square tests of independence revealed statistically significant improvements in severities of jawline volume loss, which were maximal at Month 1 (100%) and maintained until Month 6 (82.05%). At Month 1, 92.10% of participants reported being satisfied with overall treatment effects. Adverse events were expected per the product monographs and did not vary per group. On ultrasound, HA-L displayed targeted product integration and HA-D displayed diffuse product integration.
conclusionsResults support the use of HA-L and HA-D for the contouring of the jawline with each product capable of providing distinct advantages depending on patient attributes (e.g., skin thickness, underlying bone structure, desired outcomes). LEVEL III: Evidence obtained from well-designed cohort or case-control analytic studies. 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
Identifiers
39266684What 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.