ArticleJournal of cosmetic dermatology2026
Rheological and Physicochemical Properties of Hyaluronic Acid Fillers for Body Contouring: Clinical Implications and Anatomical Considerations.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Rheological and Physicochemical Properties of Hyaluronic Acid Fillers for Body Contouring: Clinical Implications and Anatomical Considerations.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
introductionThe use of hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers is rising globally. Traditionally, the rheology of HA fillers has been subject to investigations for their use in facial soft tissues. Hitherto, there has been a significant gap in understanding their rheologic properties in body applications. The requirements for body fillers are different from facial fillers as they are applied for larger volume deficits, and experience greater mechanical stress. This study aims to fill this gap by analyzing the physicochemical and rheological properties of HA body fillers to guide clinical practice. MATERIALS AND
methodsFour commercially available HA-based body fillers were analyzed under standardized laboratory conditions. The physicochemical properties, including pH, osmolality, ion concentrations, clarity, and swelling factor, were assessed. Rheological properties, including storage modulus (G'), loss modulus (G″), complex modulus (G*), and tan delta (tan δ), were assessed between 0.1 and 1 Hz.
resultsThe physicochemical analysis revealed no significant differences among the fillers, indicating uniform chemical stability. However, rheological analysis showed significant variations. Infini B Body exhibited the lowest G', G″, and G* values. In contrast, HYAcorp MLF1 and MLF2 displayed higher G' and G* values, indicating greater elasticity and stiffness. Consistent rankings between 0.1 and 1 Hz suggest stable mechanical performance under dynamic and sustained loading, supporting their suitability for high-load applications such as gluteal augmentation.
conclusionSelecting HA body fillers based on their rheological properties is crucial for optimizing outcomes, particularly in body contouring procedures where mechanical demands differ from those of facial applications. Clinicians should tailor filler selection to the specific requirements of each body area. Further research is required to validate these findings in long-term clinical settings.
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.