ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Decades of Scientific Data and Global Media Reporting on Complications in Non-surgical Aesthetic Treatments for a Transparent Safety Profile: Kissing Snow White Awake.
Article 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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Med Spas: Patient Safety and Accreditation.Aesthetic surgery journal · 2026Article
- Exploring the Therapeutic Potential of Botulinum Toxin in Treating Post-Acne Sequelae: A Critical Review.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2026Review
- Hybrid Cooperative Complexes of Low- and High-Molecular-Weight Hyaluronic Acid in Aesthetic Medicine.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Computational Modelling Suggests Bacteriostatic Saline Does Not Reverse Botulinum Toxin-Induced Brow Ptosis.Toxins · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNon-surgical aesthetic treatments (NSATs) have gained significant traction over the past two decades, prized for their minimally invasive nature, cost-effectiveness, and rapid outcomes. Yet complications associated with these procedures remain underreported, inadequately studied, and inconsistently regulated, compromising patient safety. METHODOLOGY: This mixed-methods study synthesised global data from 457 peer-reviewed studies, 37,250 media articles, 2.28 million social media posts, and regulatory databases, encompassing 231,475 documented complications. Statistical methodologies, including Cox proportional hazards models, Bayesian hierarchical modelling, and geospatial mapping, were employed to evaluate risk trends. Machine learning algorithms forecasted emerging risks, while sensitivity analyses addressed potential data biases.
resultsDermal fillers accounted for 42% of complications, chiefly granulomas, vascular occlusions, and delayed hypersensitivity reactions. Botulinum toxin A contributed 15% of cases, predominantly mild adverse effects such as headache, ptosis, and bruising. Thread lift procedures were marred by frequent extrusion and infection rates. The safest products were identified as Prabotulinumtoxin A, Juvéderm high-viscosity fillers, Profhilo, APTOS Light Lift, microneedling radiofrequency devices, Ultherapy, and EMFACE, each demonstrating > 85% safety probability. Predictive models highlighted escalating risks linked to unregulated therapies (e.g. exosomes), while geospatial analysis revealed stark regional disparities, with Asia reporting 34% of complications-attributed to medical tourism and variable oversight.
conclusionWhile advancements like standardised complication registries and ultrasound-guided techniques herald progress, transformative measures are imperative. These include mandating adverse event reporting, harmonising global regulatory frameworks, and integrating AI-driven surveillance systems. The field must prioritise transparency, rigorous credentialling, and patient-centred ethics to ensure its evolution aligns with uncompromising safety standards. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: 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
40593115What 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.