Skip to main content
. 2022 May;15(5):47–58.

TABLE 1.

Change from baseline of mean FACE-Q scores used in mid-face and nasolabial fold dermal filler studies

ARTICLE Monheit, 2020 Derm Surg 11 Kaufman-Janette, 2019 JCD12 Jones, 2020 Derm Surg 13 Ogilvie, 2020 JCD 14
Niforos, 2019 CCID 15
PRODUCT RHA2/ HYC-24L (N=74) RHA3/ HYC-24L (n=74) RHA4 vs LGP-HA-L (n= 120) LGP-HA-L via microcannula (n=60) VYC-12 (n=127)
TREATMENT SITE NLF NLF Multiple sites along midface ± zygomatic Cheeks, Forehead ± Neck
INJECTION TECHNIQUE Linear threading, multiple serial punctures, fan-like injection Linear threading, multiple serial punctures, fan-like injection Microcannula: Linear Ante/Retrograde,Depot, Fanning Intradermal injection
VOLUME USED (MEAN) RHA2: 1.54 mL
HYC-24L: 1.30 mL
RHA3: 1.52 mL
HYC-24L: 1.30 mL
Initial: RHA4: 1.54mL**
LGP-HA-L: 1.42mL
Retreatment not reported Initial: 3.0 mL
Optional retreatment: 1.6mL
Initial: 3.6mL
Optional retreatment: 2.6mL
FOLLOW UP 64 weeks
s/p initial treatment
64 weeks
s/p initial
treatment
24 weeks
s/p initial
treatment
64 weeks (s/p initial retreatment) 8 weeks
s/p single treatment
9 months /p initial/touch up treatment s/p 1 month
Retreat at 9
months (n=62)
RHA2 HYC-24L RHA3 HYC-24L RHA4 LGP-HA-L RHA4 (75% of subjects) LGP-HA-L (78.4% subjects)
CHANGE FROM BASELINE OF MEAN FACE-Q SCORE SATISFACTION WITH NLF 33.7 34.3 35 35 46.2** 40.4 45** 38.5 NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR NR 12.2* 23.7*
SATISFACTION WITH SKIN
SATISFACTION WITH OUTCOME (% “SATISFIED” OR “VERY SATISFIED“ WITH RESULTS >82% of subjects 93.1%** 85.1 97.1** 88.6 77.3 NR NR

*Significant (p<0.05) compared to baseline.

**Significantly different compared to LGP-HA-L.

HYC-24L: Juvéderm Ultra ® XC; LGP-HA-L: Large gel particle HA with lidocaine (Restylane-Lyft ®); NLF: Nasolabial Fold; NR: not reported; RHA2

(Teoxane RHA®2), RHA3 (Teoxane, RHA®3), RHA4 (Teoxane RHA®4); VYC-12 (Juvéderm® Volite™ with Lidocaine; Allergan Aesthetics, an AbbVie Company)