These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A split-face comparison of a new hyaluronic acid facial filler containing pre-incorporated lidocaine versus a standard hyaluronic acid facial filler in the treatment of naso-labial folds.
    Author: Levy PM, De Boulle K, Raspaldo H.
    Journal: J Cosmet Laser Ther; 2009 Sep; 11(3):169-73. PubMed ID: 19337944.
    Abstract:
    This split-face, single-blind study compared the comfort and ease of injection of a new hyaluronic acid facial filler containing pre-incorporated lidocaine (Juvederm ULTRA 3) versus the established hyaluronic acid facial filler Restylane-Perlane. A total of 126 individuals were treated with both products, randomly assigned to the right or left naso-labial fold. Injector assessment-indicated mean injection pain, pain of massaging the injected area and post-injection discomfort (based on a scale of 0=no pain to 10=extreme pain) were 2.1, 0.9 and 0.4 for Juvederm ULTRA 3, and 4.1, 3.3 and 1.7 for Restylane-Perlane, respectively (p<0.0001). Patient assessment of the same parameters were 2.8, 1.3 and 0.4 for Juvederm ULTRA 3, and 4.9, 3.6 and 1.8 for Restylane-Perlane (p<0.0001). Injectors indicated that 92% of Juvederm ULTRA 3 injections were 'very easy', compared with 21% for Restylane-Perlane. Post-treatment smoothness was comparable, but 95% of individuals preferred Juvederm ULTRA 3 for overall injection comfort. A total of 95% of individuals indicated that Juvederm ULTRA 3 was a more comfortable and gentle experience.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]