Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyEurope PMC

In Vitro Cytocompatibility Analysis and Comparison of Different Hyaluronic Acid Fillers for Minimally Invasive Esthetics

Pantermehl S., Foth A., Meyer E., Barbeck M., Jung O.

Laboratory Study on Face & Skin, published in In Vivo (2024) — 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
Laboratory Study
Journal
In Vivo (2024)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
38936888
PMCID
PMC11215586
DOI
10.21873/invivo.13612
Citations
4

Abstract (original English)

Background/aim To overcome the natural visual consequences of the physiological aging process, the use of biodegradable fillers made of hyaluronic acid or sodium carboxymethyl cellulose is increasingly popular in modern esthetic medicine. Clinicians can choose from a wide range of fillers with variable compositions and rheological properties, and therefore with different application areas and injection depths. The aim of this study was to analyze and compare the most commonly used fillers for facial augmentation regarding their in vitro biocompatibility and to find potential correlations to their rheological properties. Materials and methods In the present study, direct and indirect in vitro cytotoxicity analysis according to DIN EN ISO 10993-5 were performed on 39 different filler materials for facial augmentation. Results All fillers analyzed in this study overall showed satisfactory results in the direct and indirect cytocompatibility tests. While no material was outside the threshold values in the 2,3-bis-(2-methoxy-4-nitro-5-sulphenyl)-(2H)-tetrazolium-5-carboxanilide (XTT) cell viability and bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) cell proliferation assays or in the live-dead staining, only 7 out of the 39 fillers reached the required values in the lactate dehydrogenase assay. Conclusion All biodegradable fillers examined in this study were found to be sufficiently cytocompatible. Altho

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

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

How we grade evidence
HumansHyaluronic AcidBiocompatible MaterialsMaterials TestingRheologyEstheticsCell ProliferationCell SurvivalDermal Fillers

Browse all related research

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

Related research