ArticleJournal of cosmetic dermatology2026
Facial Skin Revitalization With CPM-HA20G (Hyaluronic Acid + Glycerol): A Comparative Case Series Using Three Delivery Techniques With Ultrasound Confirmation.
Article in Journal of cosmetic dermatology, 2026. 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.
- Improvement of radiation-induced skin fibrosis with hyaluronic acid injections.JAAD case reports · 2026Article
- Facial Skin Revitalization With CPM-HA20G (Hyaluronic Acid + Glycerol): A Comparative Case Series Using Three Delivery Techniques With Ultrasound Confirmation.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSkin boosters are commonly administered into the dermis or immediate subdermal plane using serial puncture technique. Alternative delivery methods, such as blunt cannulas and multiple-needle injector devices, are available, but their ability to achieve comparable clinical outcomes has been under-investigated. This case series presents the first prospective comparative evaluation of CPM-HA20G administered via three different modalities, assessing efficacy, safety, and adverse events, while utilizing ultrasound to confirm product placement. To minimize patient-related variability, a split-face study design was also employed.
objectiveTo demonstrate the efficacy, safety, and comparability of results when delivering CPM-HA20G via multiple modalities into the immediate subdermal plane.
methodsFifteen patients received three treatments of CPM-HA20G, four weeks apart, using serial puncture, blunt cannula, and multiple-needle injector device. A separate split-face case compared serial puncture with blunt cannula delivery in the same patient, with ultrasound confirmation of product placement. Satisfaction rates, pain scores, and skin quality were assessed at 4, 8, and 12 weeks.
resultsAll 15 patients across the three modalities achieved comparable improvements in skin elasticity, firmness, and hydration. High patient satisfaction was reported, with no serious adverse effects observed. A paired t-test showed pain scores were significantly lower with blunt cannula (mean 2.2) compared with serial puncture (mean 4.6) and injector device (mean 4.5) (p < 0.0001). Blunt cannula delivery was also associated with a lower incidence of bruising, suggesting clinical advantages for patient comfort and recovery.
conclusionThis case series demonstrates that serial puncture technique, blunt cannula and multiple-needle injector device can be used to deliver safe, comparable, and effective CPM-HA20G treatments. These findings highlight comparable efficacy across modalities and suggest blunt-cannula delivery enhances patient comfort and recovery time.
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.