Trial reportJournal of cosmetic dermatology2026
Advancing the Evidence on Glabellar Contraction Patterns-A Prospective Multicenter Study on Its Clinical Relevance for Glabellar Neuromodulator Injections.
Trial report 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGlabellar neuromodulator injections are frequently guided by skin surface contraction patterns, assuming that visible rhytids reflect underlying muscular anatomy. However, emerging anatomical and imaging evidence has questioned the clinical relevance of pattern-based treatment adaptations.
objectiveTo prospectively evaluate whether different glabellar contraction patterns influence clinical and patient-reported outcomes when a standardized, anatomy-based, FDA-approved 5-point injection algorithm is applied.
methodsThis prospective, multicenter clinical study enrolled 125 patients treated across five independent centers. Patients were classified into five previously described glabellar contraction patterns (V-shape, U-shape, converging arrows, omega, and inverted omega) based on standardized photographs during maximal frowning. All patients received neuromodulator injections following the same standardized 5-point technique using either onabotulinumtoxinA or abobotulinumtoxinA with dose equivalence. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Glabellar Line Severity Scale (GLSS) at baseline, 15 days, and 90 days, while patient-reported outcomes were evaluated with the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) at 90 days. Statistical analyses included non-parametric group comparisons and multivariate ordinal logistic regression.
resultsA total of 119 patients completed the study. A significant improvement in GLSS was observed at 15 days (p < 0.001), followed by partial regression at 90 days (p < 0.001 vs. baseline). No statistically significant differences in GLSS or GAIS were identified between contraction pattern groups at any time point (all p > 0.05). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that age and body mass index significantly influenced treatment outcomes, whereas glabellar contraction patterns and Fitzpatrick skin type did not. Mild, transient local adverse events were observed and resolved spontaneously.
conclusionGlabellar contraction patterns do not significantly affect clinical or patient-reported outcomes when neuromodulator injections are performed using a standardized, anatomy-based 5-point technique. These findings support prioritizing muscular anatomy and patient-specific biological factors over surface rhytid patterns in glabellar neuromodulation.
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.