ArticleGels (Basel, Switzerland)2025
A Scientific Framework for Comparing Hyaluronic Acid Filler Crosslinking Technologies.
Article in Gels (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Comparative analysis of hyaluronic acid fillers: Juvéderm Volux versus MaiLi Extreme in microstructural, rheological and mechanical properties.JPRAS open · 2026Article
- Review
- Rheological and Physicochemical Properties of Hyaluronic Acid Fillers for Body Contouring: Clinical Implications and Anatomical Considerations.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2026Article
- The Safety Profile of a Portfolio of Hyaluronic Acid-Based Soft Tissue Fillers Manufactured Using MACRO Technology: A Systematic Review of Clinical Evidence.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
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
Hyaluronic acid (HA) dermal fillers represent a cornerstone of modern esthetic medicine, providing a minimally invasive solution for facial volume restoration and skin rejuvenation. However, the diversity of available products, each utilizing distinct crosslinking technologies, presents a challenge for objective comparison and clinical decision making. This study introduces a scientific framework to evaluate and categorize the physicochemical properties of HA fillers based on two key parameter groups: dynamic parameters (e.g., rheology and gel content) and consistency parameters (e.g., extrusion force, water uptake, and gel particle size). Using standardized methodologies, 23 commercially available fillers from five major manufacturers were analyzed, enabling cross-technology comparisons. The findings reveal how specific crosslinking approaches influence the rheological behavior, handling characteristics, and potential clinical applications. By offering an integrated and reproducible assessment, this work helps practitioners select the most suitable filler for individualized treatment plans and encourages manufacturers to enhance product transparency through harmonized testing protocols.
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.