ArticleJournal of cosmetic dermatology2026
Efficacy and Safety of Calcium Hydroxylapatite for Nasal Augmentation: A 12-Month Prospective Study in a Chinese Population.
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. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCalcium hydroxylapatite (CaHA) is a biostimulatory material that induces collagen neogenesis, but its long-term volumetric dynamics following nasal injection remain insufficiently characterized. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CaHA gel for nasal augmentation in a Chinese population.
methodsIn this prospective study, 24 female patients received CaHA injections for nasal augmentation. Efficacy was assessed with three-dimensional (3D) facial scanning at 0 (immediately after injection), 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS). Safety was assessed by the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for injection-related pain and recording of injection site adverse reactions.
resultsAll 24 patients completed the 12-month follow-up. 3D volumetric analysis revealed a transient reduction from Month 0 to Month 1 (p < 0.05), followed by a modest numerical increase from Month 1 to Month 6 that did not reach statistical significance (p > 0.05). At Month 12, the volume was 0.94 ± 0.45 mL, representing a significant decline compared with Months 6 and 9 (p < 0.05). The GAIS responder rate (subjects rating "Much improved" or "Very much improved") was 79% at Month 3 and 58% at Month 9. Injection-related pain was mild (mean NRS at 0 min: 1.29) and resolved within 60 min. Adverse events were transient, primarily swelling (60.5%) and tenderness (21.1%), resolving spontaneously within 1 week. No serious complications occurred.
conclusionsCaHA injection is an effective and safe treatment for nasal augmentation, providing durable volumetric improvement and high patient satisfaction over 12 months.
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.