ArticleClinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology2026
Post-Market Observational Study of Injectable PLLA Microspheres for Facial Rejuvenation.
Article in Clinical, cosmetic and investigational 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Facial aging and dermal conditions may negatively influence the quality of life, leading patients to seek aesthetic procedures to restore a more satisfying appearance. This post-market observational study investigates the efficacy and safety of PLLA microspheres (PLLA-LASYNPRO™) in patients affected by chrono-and photoaging and other facial skin conditions. Patients and Methods: Ninety-five adult patients affected by chronoaging, photoaging and skin conditions such as oily and acne-prone skin, rosacea, or scarring, were treated with PLLA-based injectable). The patients assessed treatment outcomes through a questionnaire during the sessions and after the end of the treatment. 2D and 3D images were taken for documentation. Physicians assessed the treatment efficacy through the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) between sessions and at the 6 months follow-up. Adverse events (AEs) were evaluated immediately after the procedure and after 6 months. Results: All treated patients demonstrated visible improvement in facial appearance, with 100% showing GAIS enhancement as assessed by physicians and strong concordance from patient self-evaluations, where satisfaction was reported by 94.7% of respondents, although only 56 patients returned the follow-up questionnaire. Improvements were already present after the first session in 60% of the participants, noted in skin texture, firmness, and elasticity, with progressive enhancement over time. Only mild, transient AEs were reported, such as short-term swelling or localized discomfort, all resolving spontaneously without complications or nodular formation. Conclusion: PLLA-LASYNPRO™ proved to be a safe, effective, and well-tolerated injectable bio-regenerator. The treatment achieved high levels of patient satisfaction and compliance, producing natural, gradual, and sustained aesthetic improvements in skin quality and facial contour, particularly in the middle and lower face.
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.