TITLE:
Battle against Aging and Folds: Benefit and Risks of the Semi-Permanent Fillers Polylactic Acid and Calcium Hydroxylapatite
AUTHORS:
Elisabeth Hanf, Ursula Gresser
KEYWORDS:
Polylactic Acid, Calcium Hydroxylapatite, Sculptra®, Radiesse®, Granuloma, Semi-Permanent Fillers
JOURNAL NAME:
Advances in Aging Research,
Vol.3 No.2,
May
19,
2014
ABSTRACT:
Background: Semi-permanent fillers are among the most favorable fillers
on the market. Through their unique mode of action and its associated lasting
aesthetic effect, they take an exceptional position.
Objective: To compare the two semi-permanent fillers Poly-L-Lactic Acid (PLLA)
and calcium hydroxylapatite (CaHA) in reference to the aesthetic result,
patient satisfaction and side effects. Methods: Studies on side effects,
patient satisfaction and aesthetic results after augmentation with
semi-permanent fillers were analyzed. Results: Semi-permanent fillers seem
excellently suited for the augmentation of very deep wrinkles particularly in
the lower half of the face. In general, high patient satisfaction can be
determined with both fillers. Here, the effect from the polylactic acid can be
verified for up to two years while no effect could be verified already after
one year in a majority of the patients augmented with CaHA. Short-term side
effects such as bleedings or erythema in the region of the augmented area have
been observed in both fillers during augmentation. The incidence of nodules and
granulomas seems significantly higher in augmentations with PLLA compared to
CaHA. Rare side effects such as an embolization of a blood vessel caused by the
implant have been described for both fillers in case reports. Conclusion:
Semi-permanent fillers are superbly suited for wrinkle augmentation. Which
filler is the preferred one in what case depends strongly on the individual
needs of the patient and the therapist’s experience.