A systematic review and network meta-analysis on efficacy and safety of several hyaluronic acid fillers and collagen stimulators for facial aesthetic needs
10.3760/cma.j.cn114453-20240902-00225
- VernacularTitle:透明质酸类与胶原蛋白刺激类填充剂在面部注射填充的有效性及安全性：文献系统评价与网状meta分析
- Author:
Yimin LIANG
1
;
Ying HUANG
;
Qi LI
;
Yihan LIAO
;
Jin ZHAO
;
Hongyu WANG
;
Han YANG
;
Danru WANG
Author Information
1. 上海交通大学医学院附属第九人民医院整复外科，上海 200011
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Hyaluronic acid;
Collagen stimulators;
Clinical efficacy;
Safety;
Patient-reported outcomes;
Systematic review
- From:
Chinese Journal of Plastic Surgery
2025;41(10):1032-1047
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To systematically evaluate the efficacy, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and safety of hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers and collagen stimulators (PCL/PLLA) for various facial aesthetic indications.Methods:This study focused on facial fillers approved and widely used in China, including HA fillers such as Juvéderm?, Restylane?, Belotero?, Fillmed?, and PCL/PLLA such as Ellansé?, L?viselle?, and CureWhite?. A systematic literature search was conducted across both English and Chinese databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, and Wanfang Data, covering the period from database inception to August 24, 2023, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The characteristics and outcomes of the included RCTs were summarized and analyzed, including efficacy indicators by injection site, patient satisfaction, and safety profiles. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed using R software to compare efficacy outcomes, including the 6-month improvement response rate for nasolabial folds (NLF) and the global aesthetic improvement scale (GAIS).Results:A total of 38 articles were included. Among them, Juvéderm? was most frequently used as the treatment group (17 out of 38 articles), while Restylane? was the most common comparator (17 out of 38 articles), particularly in studies involving NLF injections (15 out of 16 articles). For collagen stimulators, only 2 studies on Ellansé? were included, both focusing solely on NLF treatment. Quality assessment showed that 34 studies were of medium to high quality, with Juvéderm? accounting for the majority of high-quality studies (11 articles). Based on injection sites, NLF was the most studied area (16 articles), followed by the midface (8 articles), and the remaining 14 articles covered other regions including lips, nose, chin, and infraorbital area. In the NLF region, the 6-month improvement response rate assessed by blinded investigators showed that Juvéderm? showed better outcomes than Restylane? ( RR=1.07, 95% CI: 0.89-1.32), while Belotero? was slightly inferior to Restylane? ( RR=0.97, 95% CI: 0.65-1.44), although the differences were not statistically significant. Subject-reported outcomes showed consistent trends with investigator assessments. For 6-month GAIS improvement, Juvéderm? and Restylane? showed comparable result within the HA filler category ( RR=1.01, 95% CI: 0.71-1.43). The collagen stimulator Ellansé? demonstrated numerically higher values than HA fillers ( RR=1.32, 95% CI: 0.86-2.08). However, none of these differences reached statistical significance. In midface treatments, Juvéderm? had more long-term evidence, with follow-up periods extending up to 24 months. Four studies reported numerically greater volume enhancement with Juvéderm? compared to Restylane?. For other facial areas, Juvéderm? had the most comprehensive clinical evidence, covering the widest range of injection sites. No relevant RCTs were available for collagen stimulators in these regions. Regarding patient satisfaction, 19 studies reported patient-reported outcomes, with Juvéderm? contributing 16 of them, and showing higher satisfaction in 6 head-to-head comparisons with Restylane?. In contrast, collagen stimulators currently lack such evidence. Safety result indicated that HA fillers were generally safe and well tolerated, while safety data for collagen stimulators remain limited due to insufficient high-quality evidence. Conclusion:Among the HA fillers, Juvéderm? has a large quantity and highest quality of clinical studies, and NMA result shows its superior efficacy in NLF. In comparison, the current evidence is still not sufficient to draw a clear conclusion for the PCL/PLLA due to a lack of adequate high-quality clinical evidence regarding its clinical efficacy, PROs, and safety.
