Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewPubMed

Blindness caused by cosmetic filler injection: a review of cause and therapy.

Carruthers JDA., Fagien S., Rohrich RJ., Weinkle S., Carruthers A.

Narrative Review on Face & Skin, published in Plast Reconstr Surg (2014) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
Plast Reconstr Surg (2014)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
25415089
DOI
10.1097/PRS.0000000000000754

Abstract (original English)

Vascular occlusion causing blindness is a rare yet greatly feared complication of the use of facial aesthetic fillers. The authors performed a review of the aesthetic literature to ascertain the reported cases of blindness and the literature reporting variations in the vascular anatomy of the human face. The authors suggest a small but potentially helpful addition to the accepted management of the acute case. Cases of blindness, mostly irreversible, from aesthetic filler injections have been reported from Asia, Europe, and North America. Autologous fat appears to be the most frequent filler causing blindness. Some cases of partial visual recovery have been reported with hyaluronic acid and calcium hydroxylapatite fillers. The sudden profusion of new medical and nonmedical aesthetic filler injectors raises a new cause for alarm about patient safety. The published reports in the medical literature are made by experienced aesthetic surgeons and thus the actual incidence may be even higher. Also, newer injectors may not be aware of the variations in the pattern of facial vascular arborization. The authors present a summary of the relevant literature to date and a suggested helpful addition to the protocols for urgent management.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
Biocompatible MaterialsBlindnessCosmetic TechniquesDurapatiteEmbolismHumansHyaluronic AcidHyaluronoglucosaminidaseInjections, IntradermalSubcutaneous Fat

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research