| Literature DB >> 32355806 |
Chrisanthi Karapantzou1,2, Mark Jakob3, Brian Kinney4, Joan Vandeputte5, Joao Pedro Vale6, Martin Canis3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The search for effectiveness and safety in the use of dermal fillers, is an ongoing challenge for aesthetic physicians, plastic surgeons and the science of bioengineering. Understanding the variety of characteristics, capabilities, advantages and disadvantages of available injectables is essential to reduce complication rates and achieve satisfying aesthetic and functional results.Entities:
Keywords: Agarose gel; facial reconstruction; facial rejuvenation; hydrocolloid biomaterial; natural filler
Year: 2020 PMID: 32355806 PMCID: PMC7186688 DOI: 10.21037/atm.2020.02.52
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Transl Med ISSN: 2305-5839
Figure 1Injection of Algeness 2.5% around a provox prosthesis after total laryngectomy, to manage a periprosthetic leakage of liquids, saliva and food.
Figure 2Immediate volumizing effect at the cranial aspect of the prosthesis, with direct improvement of the treated leakage.
Figure 3Deep nasolabial folds in a 38-year-old patient. Status pre-injection.
Figure 4Immediate result after injecting a total amount of 1, 4 mL of Algeness 3.5%.
Figure 5Full face lifting and contouring with algeness. (A) Female, Caucasian patient aged 44, before treatment. (B) Areas injected with Algeness DF 3.5% close to bone during seven sessions. Some areas were injected more than one time. Total amount: 20.9 mL. (C) Area injected with Algeness VL 2.5% deep subcutaneous during the sixth session. Total amount: 1.4 mL. (D) Area injected with Algeness HD 1.5% superficial subcutaneous during the seventh session. Total amount: 2.8 mL. (E) Result 13 months after the first session and 4 months after the last session.