ArticleAesthetic surgery journal2025
Enhancing Skin Quality With a Sequential Treatment Using 2 Hyaluronic Acid Dermal Fillers: A Prospective, Multicenter, Interventional Study.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSkin quality affects facial attractiveness, which can significantly impact self-esteem and overall quality of life. The preferred fillers for enhancing skin quality are noncrosslinked or slightly crosslinked hyaluronic acid gels, such as RHA1 and R1, because they diffuse more easily into peripheral tissues.
objectivesThis study was designed to assess the performance and safety of RHA1 treatment for fine lines, such as smiling lines (SLs), including an exploratory arm assessing the performance of subsequent R1 treatments.
methodsSKINQARE was a prospective, multicenter, low-interventional, open-label study. The primary outcome was Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) score recorded at 2 months postinjection with RHA1. Questionnaires were used to evaluate both patient and investigator satisfaction. Skin quality parameters were measured with standard equipment and the VISIA CANFIELD imaging system. Safety assessment covered adverse events (AEs), injection site pain, and common treatment responses.
resultsThe primary endpoint was met, with 92.7% of patients exhibiting GAIS improvement 2 months after receiving RHA1 treatment for SLs. Subsequent treatment with R1 doubled the "very satisfied" rate compared with RHA1 alone at 6 months. Patients also reported prolonged skin firmness, smoothness, and bounce, along with a refreshed feeling. No serious AEs were reported during the study.
conclusionsRHA1 was effective for skin beautification in all indications, including SLs, and subsequent R1 treatment improved performance. Both treatments were well tolerated. These findings highlight the potential benefits of using a combined treatment approach to improve skin quality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3: (Therapeutic).
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.