Enrique Gorbea1, Sarah Kidwai2, Joshua Rosenberg1. 1. Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA. 2. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nonsurgical rejuvenation of the tear trough area via the use of injectable filler material has become a popular procedure in facial rejuvenation. This procedure offers immediate, albeit temporary, results with minimal recovery time. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review was to report on patient satisfaction and complication rates to further guide practitioners. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus libraries were queried for articles containing relevant terms. Articles with more than 5 patients who reported on satisfaction and/or complications from the procedure were included for review. In addition to these variables, we noted other aspects of injection, including filler material, technique, and needle or cannula delivery. Studies that did not otherwise fulfill inclusion criteria for statistical analysis but reported on intravascular injection-related complications were cited. RESULTS: Initial query resulted in 1655 studies which were assessed for duplicates and inclusion/exclusion criteria. After screening, 28 articles were included for analysis. In total, 1956 patients were captured who had been injected with 1 of 4 materials: hyaluronic acid (1535), calcium hydroxyapatite (376), autologous fibroblast/keratin gel (35), and collagen-based filler (10). Short- and long-term satisfaction rates were 84.4% and 76.7%, respectively. Minor complications were common (44%). Secondarily, we found the use of cannula for filler injection of this region to be associated with a lower rate of ecchymosis (7% vs 17%, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Filler injection volumization of tear trough deformity is an effective technique for facial rejuvenation associated with high patient satisfaction. Multiple filler materials offer acceptable satisfaction and complication profiles.
BACKGROUND: Nonsurgical rejuvenation of the tear trough area via the use of injectable filler material has become a popular procedure in facial rejuvenation. This procedure offers immediate, albeit temporary, results with minimal recovery time. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review was to report on patient satisfaction and complication rates to further guide practitioners. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus libraries were queried for articles containing relevant terms. Articles with more than 5 patients who reported on satisfaction and/or complications from the procedure were included for review. In addition to these variables, we noted other aspects of injection, including filler material, technique, and needle or cannula delivery. Studies that did not otherwise fulfill inclusion criteria for statistical analysis but reported on intravascular injection-related complications were cited. RESULTS: Initial query resulted in 1655 studies which were assessed for duplicates and inclusion/exclusion criteria. After screening, 28 articles were included for analysis. In total, 1956 patients were captured who had been injected with 1 of 4 materials: hyaluronic acid (1535), calcium hydroxyapatite (376), autologous fibroblast/keratin gel (35), and collagen-based filler (10). Short- and long-term satisfaction rates were 84.4% and 76.7%, respectively. Minor complications were common (44%). Secondarily, we found the use of cannula for filler injection of this region to be associated with a lower rate of ecchymosis (7% vs 17%, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Filler injection volumization of tear trough deformity is an effective technique for facial rejuvenation associated with high patient satisfaction. Multiple filler materials offer acceptable satisfaction and complication profiles.