Cargando…

Risk Comparison of Filler Embolism Between Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA) and Hyaluronic Acid (HA)

BACKGROUND: The incidence of vascular complications varies among different fillers. The main purpose of this study was to compare the risk of embolism between PMMA (Artecoll) and hyaluronic acid (HA, Restylane) after artery injection. METHODS: Rabbit ears were injected via the central artery with 0....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nie, Fangfei, Xie, Hongbin, Wang, Guanhuier, An, Yang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6522461/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30824948
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00266-019-01320-w
_version_ 1783419120460496896
author Nie, Fangfei
Xie, Hongbin
Wang, Guanhuier
An, Yang
author_facet Nie, Fangfei
Xie, Hongbin
Wang, Guanhuier
An, Yang
author_sort Nie, Fangfei
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The incidence of vascular complications varies among different fillers. The main purpose of this study was to compare the risk of embolism between PMMA (Artecoll) and hyaluronic acid (HA, Restylane) after artery injection. METHODS: Rabbit ears were injected via the central artery with 0.1 ml PMMA (group A), 0.1 ml HA (group B), 0.2 ml PMMA (group C), or 0.2 mL HA (group D), respectively. The formation of transparent emboli was monitored right after injection. Tissue necrosis and histopathological changes were analyzed on day 7. RESULTS: With 0.1 ml injected volume, PMMA was dispersed within a few minutes and only 5% of the injected ears had mild necrosis on day 7, while HA tended to form obvious transparent emboli, an indication of blood vessel clotting, and 60% of injected ears showed necrosis on day 7. With 0.2 ml injected volume, PMMA had a risk of complete blood vessel clotting in between 0.1 ml PMMA group and 0.1 ml HA group, and 30% of injected ears had necrosis; in contrast, 100% of 0.2 ml HA-injected ears showed transparent emboli and necrosis. The necrosis areas were significantly increased in the HA groups compared with PMMA groups at the same injection volumes. HA injection also caused dilation of small blood vessels. CONCLUSION: At the same injection volume, PMMA had less risk of embolism compared with HA. With increased injection volume, there were increased risks of embolism and necrosis for both PMMA and HA. NO LEVEL ASSIGNED: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00266-019-01320-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6522461
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65224612019-06-05 Risk Comparison of Filler Embolism Between Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA) and Hyaluronic Acid (HA) Nie, Fangfei Xie, Hongbin Wang, Guanhuier An, Yang Aesthetic Plast Surg Original Article BACKGROUND: The incidence of vascular complications varies among different fillers. The main purpose of this study was to compare the risk of embolism between PMMA (Artecoll) and hyaluronic acid (HA, Restylane) after artery injection. METHODS: Rabbit ears were injected via the central artery with 0.1 ml PMMA (group A), 0.1 ml HA (group B), 0.2 ml PMMA (group C), or 0.2 mL HA (group D), respectively. The formation of transparent emboli was monitored right after injection. Tissue necrosis and histopathological changes were analyzed on day 7. RESULTS: With 0.1 ml injected volume, PMMA was dispersed within a few minutes and only 5% of the injected ears had mild necrosis on day 7, while HA tended to form obvious transparent emboli, an indication of blood vessel clotting, and 60% of injected ears showed necrosis on day 7. With 0.2 ml injected volume, PMMA had a risk of complete blood vessel clotting in between 0.1 ml PMMA group and 0.1 ml HA group, and 30% of injected ears had necrosis; in contrast, 100% of 0.2 ml HA-injected ears showed transparent emboli and necrosis. The necrosis areas were significantly increased in the HA groups compared with PMMA groups at the same injection volumes. HA injection also caused dilation of small blood vessels. CONCLUSION: At the same injection volume, PMMA had less risk of embolism compared with HA. With increased injection volume, there were increased risks of embolism and necrosis for both PMMA and HA. NO LEVEL ASSIGNED: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00266-019-01320-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer US 2019-03-01 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6522461/ /pubmed/30824948 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00266-019-01320-w Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Article
Nie, Fangfei
Xie, Hongbin
Wang, Guanhuier
An, Yang
Risk Comparison of Filler Embolism Between Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA) and Hyaluronic Acid (HA)
title Risk Comparison of Filler Embolism Between Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA) and Hyaluronic Acid (HA)
title_full Risk Comparison of Filler Embolism Between Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA) and Hyaluronic Acid (HA)
title_fullStr Risk Comparison of Filler Embolism Between Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA) and Hyaluronic Acid (HA)
title_full_unstemmed Risk Comparison of Filler Embolism Between Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA) and Hyaluronic Acid (HA)
title_short Risk Comparison of Filler Embolism Between Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA) and Hyaluronic Acid (HA)
title_sort risk comparison of filler embolism between polymethyl methacrylate (pmma) and hyaluronic acid (ha)
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6522461/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30824948
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00266-019-01320-w
work_keys_str_mv AT niefangfei riskcomparisonoffillerembolismbetweenpolymethylmethacrylatepmmaandhyaluronicacidha
AT xiehongbin riskcomparisonoffillerembolismbetweenpolymethylmethacrylatepmmaandhyaluronicacidha
AT wangguanhuier riskcomparisonoffillerembolismbetweenpolymethylmethacrylatepmmaandhyaluronicacidha
AT anyang riskcomparisonoffillerembolismbetweenpolymethylmethacrylatepmmaandhyaluronicacidha