Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2014 Oct;25(5):448-52.
doi: 10.3109/09546634.2013.814756.

Efficacy and safety of a new monophasic hyaluronic acid filler in the correction of nasolabial folds: a randomized, evaluator-blinded, split-face study

Do Young Rhee  1 , Chong Hyun Won, Sung Eun Chang, Tai Kyung Noh, Myoung Shin Kim, Beom Joon Kim, Gyeong Hun Park, Jee Soo An, Mi Woo Lee, Jee Ho Choi, Kee Chan Moon, Sung Hoon Lim
Affiliations
Free article
Randomized Controlled Trial

Efficacy and safety of a new monophasic hyaluronic acid filler in the correction of nasolabial folds: a randomized, evaluator-blinded, split-face study

Do Young Rhee et al. J Dermatolog Treat. 2014 Oct.
Free article

Erratum in

  • Erratum.
    [No authors listed] [No authors listed] J Dermatolog Treat. 2015 Feb;26(1):99. doi: 10.3109/09546634.2015.957007. Epub 2015 Feb 13. J Dermatolog Treat. 2015. PMID: 25675842 No abstract available.

Abstract

Background: Hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers are frequently used for the correction of facial soft-tissue defects.

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of a novel monophasic HA filler (mono-HA), and a well-studied biphasic HA filler (bi-HA), in the treatment of moderate to severe nasolabial folds.

Methods: In this randomized, evaluator-blinded, split-face comparative study, subjects were randomized for injections with mono-HA or bi-HA on the left or right side of the face. Efficacy was determined by calculating the change in the Wrinkle Severity Rating Score (WSRS) relative to baseline. Local safety was assessed on the basis of subject diary entries which recorded erythema, swelling, induration, pruritus, irritation, mass, hematoma, pain, and dryness.

Results: At week 24, the mean improvement in the WSRS from baseline was 2.18 ± 0.42 for the mono-HA side and 2.16 ± 0.41 for the bi-HA side. Both fillers were well-tolerated and adverse reactions were mild and transient in most cases.

Conclusions: Mono-HA has a non-inferior efficacy to bi-HA in the treatment of moderate to severe nasolabial folds.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources