Lee et al. [36] |
Periocular rejuvenation |
Randomized, double-blind, split-face trial with 30 participants |
PN filler improved skin elasticity and texture more than hyaluronic acid filler; minimal adverse reactions |
IIb |
Cavallini et al. [37] |
PN-HPT in aesthetic medicine |
Consensus report by expert panel |
PN-HPT improves skin texture, reduces inflammation, and enhances collagen production; safe and effective |
V |
Pak et al. [38] |
PN vs. hyaluronic acid filler for crow’s feet |
Phase III, randomized, double-blind trial with 120 patients |
PN filler had longer duration of action and better efficacy than HA filler; well-tolerated |
Ib |
Jeong et al. [39] |
PN vs. polycaprolactone (PCL) for canthal lines |
Split-face study with 20 patients |
Both fillers improved wrinkles; PN had faster action and fewer adverse reactions |
IIa |
Webb et al. [40] |
Role of PN in regenerative and aesthetic medicine |
Comprehensive review of 35 studies |
PN promotes cellular proliferation, migration, and differentiation; beneficial for tissue regeneration |
Ia |
Kim et al. [41] |
PN for lateral canthal lines |
Study with 20 patients |
Significant improvement in wrinkle appearance; well-tolerated |
IIb |
Oh et al. [42] |
HPPLA vs. other fillers |
Study with 30 patients |
HPPLA had higher satisfaction and better outcomes; lower adverse effects |
IIc |
Lim et al. [43] |
PN for Asian skin regeneration |
Literature review |
HPT stimulates collagen production and improves skin elasticity; effective for facial rejuvenation |
V |
Park et al. [23] |
Long-chain PN fillers for skin rejuvenation |
Study with 5 patients |
Significant improvements in wrinkles and texture; long-lasting effects |
IV |