Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40406769›Full record

ReviewCureus2025

Risk Factor Analysis for Vascular Occlusions After Dermal Filler Injections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Adham Chakhachiro, Maaz Waseem

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Adham ChakhachiroDermatology, Clinic Platina, London, GBR.
Maaz WaseemBiological Sciences, Atta-Ur-Rehman School of Applied Biosciences, National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Islamabad, PAK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This systematic review and meta-analysis investigate the risk factors associated with vascular occlusions following dermal filler injections, a rare but serious complication in aesthetic medicine. Fourteen studies involving various filler materials and injection sites were analyzed to identify patient and procedural variables influencing clinical outcomes. The most frequently used filler was hyaluronic acid (HA) (61.3%), and most complications occurred in female patients (71%). Anatomical regions with complex vasculature, such as the glabella, nose, and nasolabial folds, were most commonly implicated. Recovery outcomes were significantly influenced by the specific vessels involved, with occlusions in smaller arteries showing a better prognosis. Timely recognition and intervention were associated with improved recovery, with delays beyond five days correlating with permanent deficits. Hyaluronidase use in HA-related occlusions yielded high partial or total recovery rates with an 84.2% success rate, reaffirming its role as a first-line treatment. Based on the analysis, a morbidity risk assessment tool was developed to stratify patients into low-, moderate-, and high-risk categories, offering practical value for clinical decision-making. The findings underscore the importance of anatomical precision, prompt intervention, and standardized treatment protocols.

Indexed as

hyaluronic acid fillershyaluronidasemeta-analysisreconstructive dentistryretinal vascular occlusions

Identifiers

PMID40406769
PMCPMC12097758

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.