Rutnumnoi T.Palakornkitti P.Anuntrangsee T.Yongpisarn T.Sakpuwadol N.Vachiramon V.Mahidol University2025-05-112025-05-112025-05-01Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology Vol.24 No.5 (2025)14732130https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/110046Background: Various therapeutic options have been introduced for enlarged facial pores including low cross-linked hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers. Newer formulations of HA-based dermal fillers are continuously introduced into the market, but their effectiveness in reducing enlarged facial pores has not yet been determined. Objectives: To compare the efficacy of HA-based dermal fillers (Cohesive Polydensified Matrix HA filler; CPM-HA20) versus CPM-HA20 with glycerol (CPM-HA20G) in terms of minimizing enlarged facial pores and skin quality improvement. Methods: Thirty subjects with enlarged facial pores were enrolled in this randomized, double-blinded, split-face study. Participants were randomly assigned to be injected with 1 mL of CPM-HA20 filler on one side of their medial cheek and 1 mL of CPM-HA20G on the contralateral side for 3 sessions spaced 4 weeks apart. Pore volume was objectively measured by an Antera 3D. Skin biophysical properties were evaluated. Participant satisfaction and adverse events were recorded. Results: Twenty-nine participants completed the study. Both treatment groups showed a reduction in the mean pore volume from the baseline through Week 32. The CPM-HA20G treated side showed a 24.2% higher reduction in mean pore volume from baseline compared to the CPM-HA20 treated side (p = 0.038). Both treatment groups showed improvement in skin hydration from baseline to Week 32. There was no significant difference in patient satisfaction between the CPM-HA20G and CPM-HA20 treated sides. Only mild adverse events such as pain, edema, and bruising were reported. Conclusion: Three-monthly injections of CPM-HA20G and CPM-HA20 were effective in minimizing enlarged face pores and improving skin hydration. CPM-HA20G demonstrated superior efficacy in terms of pore size reduction. Adverse events were generally mild and tolerable.MedicineArticleSCOPUS10.1111/jocd.702092-s2.0-10500421080114732165