ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2025
Safety and Performance of RHA4 in the Midface Using the Multilayering Technique: Preclinical and Clinical Evidence.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 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.
- Debunking Myths on Hyaluronic Acid Injectable Gels in Clinical Practice.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Resilient hyaluronic acid (RHA) fillers are used to treat dynamic wrinkles or provide tissue lifting in facial aesthetics. This study explored the biological, biomechanical, and clinical safety and performance of RHA4, a volumizing hyaluronic acid filler tailored for tissue support in dynamic facial areas, upon interaction with human subcutaneous adipose tissue (AT). Methods: RHA4 underwent cytocompatibility testing with human fibroblasts and adipose stem cells. A 1-year rat in vivo implantation study tracked tissue integration, local effects, and filler degradation. Biomechanical tests assessed RHA4's impact on subcutaneous AT mechanics. Clinical outcomes, safety, injection volumes, and techniques were evaluated in 35 patients, treated in midface deep and superficial fat compartments via a multilayering methodology. Dynamic outcomes and 2-year follow-up of RHA4 in the midface using multilayer treatments were described. Results: RHA4 demonstrated excellent biocompatibility and tissue integration both in vitro and in vivo, exhibiting minimal local inflammation and rapid collagen bundle formation within the filler. It integrated gradually over time and was well tolerated, allowing for increased extracellular matrix presence, neovascularization, denser collagen deposition, and AT growth. Ex vivo, RHA4 did not impede fat motion biomechanics but visibly lifted the tissue. Clinically, RHA4 proved safe and effective for lifting both deep and superficial fat compartments in the midface without affecting facial expressiveness. Conclusions: Preclinical and clinical evidence confirmed that RHA4 is a versatile filler capable of lifting tissue efficiently, whether deep or superficial, particularly through the multilayering treatment approach. Importantly, RHA4 preserves AT biomechanics, adapts to the dynamism of the face, and ensures natural-looking outcomes.
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.