The effect of combined of hyaluronic acid dermal filler and microfocused ultrasound treatment: A clinicopathological study

dc.contributor.authorVachiramon V.
dc.contributor.authorRutnin S.
dc.contributor.authorPatcharapojanart C.
dc.contributor.authorChittasirinuvat N.
dc.contributor.otherMahidol University
dc.date.accessioned2023-05-19T08:24:01Z
dc.date.available2023-05-19T08:24:01Z
dc.date.issued2023-03-01
dc.description.abstractObjectives: Microfocused ultrasound (MFU) and hyaluronic acid (HA) filler injection are increasingly popular aesthetic procedures. HA filler injection is generally recommended after MFU if combined treatment is required in a single visit. However, data regarding the safe and optimal time of MFU treatment after HA injection is still limited. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the degree of HA loss when performing MFU treatment after dermal filler injection. Methods: Fourteen subjects were recruited in this pilot study. HA was injected intradermally on four 2 × 2 cm areas at the abdomen (0.25 ml/site). Site A was served as control whereas site B, C, D were treated with MFU using 1.5 mm transducer at 60 min, Day 14, and Day 28 after the injection, respectively. All experimental sites were biopsied using a 3-mm punch biopsy to evaluate the histopathological profile at baseline and Day 56. Grading of the quantity of retained HA was evaluated by a blinded experienced dermatopathologist. Results: All 14 subjects completed the study. One subject has been excluded due to the poor quality of histopathologic slides. Seven subjects (53.9%) at site B and 6 subjects (46.2%) at site C had HA loss at Day 56 compared with baseline. The mean HA grading at baseline and Day 56 was 3.7 vs. 2.8 (p < 0.001) at site B and 3.7 vs. 3.0 (p = 0.001) at site C, respectively. There was no statistical difference between the mean HA grading at baseline and Day 56 at site D (3.7 vs. 3.3, p = 0.073). No inflammation or granuloma was observed on Day 56 of the study. Conclusions: MFU treatment after HA injection appears to be safe. However, some degree of HA loss was observed if MFU treatment was done within 2 weeks after HA injection.
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Cosmetic Dermatology Vol.22 No.3 (2023) , 792-797
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/jocd.15498
dc.identifier.eissn14732165
dc.identifier.issn14732130
dc.identifier.pmid36374232
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85142192463
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/82391
dc.rights.holderSCOPUS
dc.subjectMedicine
dc.titleThe effect of combined of hyaluronic acid dermal filler and microfocused ultrasound treatment: A clinicopathological study
dc.typeArticle
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85142192463&origin=inward
oaire.citation.endPage797
oaire.citation.issue3
oaire.citation.startPage792
oaire.citation.titleJournal of Cosmetic Dermatology
oaire.citation.volume22
oairecerif.author.affiliationFaculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University

Files

Collections