Risk of Severe Adverse Reactions To an Injectable Filler Based on a Fixed Combination of Hydroxyethylmethacrylate and Ethylmethacrylate with Hyaluronic Acid

Lipofilling after Laser-Assisted Treatment for Facial Filler Complication: Volumetric and Regenerative Effect

BACKGROUND

Nonresorbable substances are still injected to enhance soft-tissue volumes and fill subcutaneous defects. The minimally invasive intralesional laser treatment can remove foreign substances and the inflammatory reaction, eventually leaving depression and scar tissue in the treated area. Fat grafting can restore volume loss and improve scar tissue.

METHODS

From March of 2010 to February of 2017, 33 patients were studied. All of them had suffered from inflammatory reactions to permanent facial fillers and had been treated with the 808-nm diode laser at the authors' institution. The evacuation of material had left facial asymmetry and visible depression. To restore facial aesthetic units, fat grafting was performed. The minimum follow-up was 6 months.

RESULTS

Volume restoration was recognized (according to the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale) as significantly improved in 22 patients, moderately improved in eight patients, and slightly improved in three patients. Improvement in atrophic and scarred tissues (with an apparent thickening of the skin or even elimination of scars) was also assessed with the following results: 25 patients were very much improved and eight were moderately improved.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study on filler-induced complications of the face treated by intralesional laser treatment followed by lipofilling. A systematic approach to volume restoration is proposed to patients who had filler removal of the face. There was a high degree of patient satisfaction with this technique.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.

Rhinoplasty with Fillers and Fat Grafting

Nonsurgical rhinoplasty is one choice for cases in which open surgery may be harmful, the deformity is not indicated to correct with open surgery, or in patients who have phobia of general anesthesia or any type of surgery. Autologous fat injection or fillers are most common materials currently available in the market. In this article, we explain the indications, contraindications, methods, and complications of this treatment.

Dermal fillers do not induce upregulation of NLRP3 inflammasomes or expression of inflammatory cytokines in granulomas

BACKGROUND

Filling materials have increasingly been used in aesthetics over the last decades. Understanding the pathophysiology of granuloma formation as a very relevant unwanted side effect of filler application may be essential to help avoid these adverse events.

AIMS

Our aim was to investigate the role of the inflammasome in the formation of filler granuloma, as a central column of the innate immune response.

METHODS

RPMI 1640 medium was used for growth of THP-1 cells and the induction of THP-1 macrophages. Sonication was applied in order to crush the acrylic particles of the filler. ELISA was the method of analysis for the specific cytokines. Biopsy specimens of filler granuloma were analyzed by various immunohistochemical methods. GraphPad Prism 5 software was used for the statistical data analysis.

RESULTS

Neither was the sensor NALP3 overexpressed, nor could an elevated expression of cleaved IL-1β, IL-18, or IFN-γ be detected. Furthermore, no increased expression of IL-8 or IL-1β was detectable in vitro.

CONCLUSION

No increased inflammasome activation could be observed; however, filler granulomas were infiltrated with granulocytes and macrophages. Therefore, we speculate that an unspecific immune response might be the key player in the formation of filler granuloma.

Autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants-ASIA-related to biomaterials: analysis of 45 cases and comprehensive review of the literature

Systemic autoimmune or granulomatous disorders related to biomaterials of human use have rarely been described. The aim of this study was to report cases of autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA) related to biomaterial injections and prostheses, mainly silicone, hyaluronic acid, acrylamides and methacrylate compounds in a Spanish patient cohort. This study is a retrospective analysis of clinical, laboratory, histopathological and follow-up data of 45 cases of patients suffering from late-onset, non-infectious inflammatory/autoimmune disorders related to bioimplants. Late onset was defined as 3 months or more post injection. Data were obtained through a further non-systematic but comprehensive review of the literature. Forty-five cases of late-onset adverse reactions related to biomaterial injections or prostheses were reviewed. All cases had systemic complaints that could be categorised as ASIA. In all but four patients, inflammatory features at the implantation site preceded distant or systemic manifestations. Abnormal blood tests were common. Localised inflammatory nodules and panniculitis in 40/45 (88.88%) evolved into a variety of disorders, viz., primary biliary cirrhosis, Sjögren's syndrome, sarcoidosis, human adjuvant disease, vasculitis, inflammatory bowel syndrome and inflammatory polyradiculopathy. Five (11.11%) cases presented primarily with systemic autoimmune disorders. Biomaterials and prostheses can provoke late-onset systemic autoimmune disorders fulfilling ASIA criteria, or present primarily local/regional inflammatory reactions that may eventually evolve into systemic autoimmune and/or granulomatous disorders which fall under ASIA.

Adverse effects of fillers

Filler injections belong to the most frequently performed noninvasive beautifying procedures. When done correctly they are generally well tolerated. However, a number of factors, such as poor filler quality, and particularly host as well as user dependent filler reactions may lead to unwanted effects. These may be early, late, or delayed events with characteristics for each of them. Temporary fillers almost invariably cause temporary side effects whereas those of permanent fillers may last forever. Some fillers are notorious for their poor safety profile; for example, silicone is banned in the European Union and the United States but nevertheless used by many practitioners and beauticians. Many fillers can be identified in histopathologic sections allowing specific measures to be instituted.

Dermalive Facial Filler Granulomas Masquerading as Neurofibromas

A 56-year-old woman presented with periocular nodules that were clinically suspected to be neurofibromas. Histopathologic examination of excised nodules revealed a pronounced granulomatous reaction to a foreign material that was composed of glossy polygonal palely eosinophilic fragments. These fragments were outlined in red with Masson trichrome, stained gray with the elastic stain, and were uniformly red with Gomori methenamine silver staining. The histopathologic appearance was consistent with a granulomatous reaction to Dermalive facial filler. Postoperatively the patient admitted that she had filler injections many years earlier in another country, and that nodules appeared 1 year after injection. Treatment with steroids, intralesional immunosuppressive agents and surgery had been previously attempted to eradicate the nodules. The literature pertaining to granulomatous reactions to Dermalive and related hybrid facial fillers is reviewed and treatment options are discussed. This report is the first to illustrate the unique histopathologic staining characteristics of Dermalive, which may be useful to ophthalmic pathologists in identifying this uncommon foreign material.

Managing Complications of Fillers: Rare and Not-So-Rare

Fillers belong to the most frequently used beautifying products. They are generally well tolerated, but any one of them may occasionally produce adverse side effects. Adverse effects usually last as long as the filler is in the skin, which means that short-lived fillers have short-term side effects and permanent fillers may induce life-long adverse effects. The main goal is to prevent them, however, this is not always possible. Utmost care has to be given to the prevention of infections and the injection technique has to be perfect. Treatment of adverse effects is often with hyaluronidase or steroid injections and in some cases together with 5-fluorouracil plus allopurinol orally. Histological examination of biopsy specimens often helps to identify the responsible filler allowing a specific treatment to be adapted.

Granulomatous foreign-body reactions to permanent fillers: detection of CD123+ plasmacytoid dendritic cells

BACKGROUND

Soft-tissue augmentation with permanent fillers can lead to severe granulomatous foreign-body reactions (GFBRs), but the immune pathomechanism of this complication is still unknown. We performed conventional histologic examination and immunostaining for plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs) in skin sections from patients with GFBR to 4 permanent filler agents, which have been widely used in recent decades.

METHODS

Twenty-one skin biopsies were studied from 19 patients with GFBR to polyalkylimide 4% gel (PAIG, n = 10), polyacrylamide 2.5% gel (PAAG, n = 2), hydroxyethyl methacrylate/ethyl methacrylate in hyaluronic acid (HEMA/EMA, n = 4), or liquid injectable silicone (n = 5). GFBRs were analyzed in hematoxylin and eosin stained sections and pDCs detected using CD123 antibodies. Anti-CD11c immunostaining was performed for comparison.

RESULTS

Grading of the inflammatory infiltrates observed histologically did not correlate with the clinical features of inflammation. Immunostaining for CD123 did not detect pDCs in 8 of 10 polyalkylimide gel, 1 of 2 polyacrylamide gel, and the 5 liquid injectable silicone biopsies. In contrast, all 4 HEMA/EMA biopsies contained collections of pDCs in lymphocytic infiltrates close to filler particles and adjacent sarcoidal granulomas.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that pDCs contribute to the sarcoidal granulomas associated with injected HEMA/EMA. Recruited pDCs may exert their pro-inflammatory effects by the release of interferon-α at the site of these filler deposits.

Complications After Facial Injections With Permanent Fillers: Important Limitations and Considerations of MRI Evaluation

BACKGROUND

Soft-tissue fillers have become more prevalent for facial augmentation in the last 2 decades, even though complications of permanent fillers can be challenging to treat. An investigative imaging tool could aid in assessing the nature and extent of these complications when clinical findings are ambiguous.

OBJECTIVES

The authors analyzed the value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the assessment of delayed-onset complications after injection of patients with permanent fillers.

METHODS

Thirty-two patients with complications related to facial fillers were evaluated in this prospective cohort study. Their medical history was documented, and MRI was conducted before treatment of the complications. Radiologists were informed of the injection sites but were blinded to the results of other clinical evaluations. Levels of agreement between clinical and radiologic findings were calculated with the Jaccard similarity coefficient.

RESULTS

A total of 107 site-specific clinicoradiologic evaluations were analyzed. The level of agreement was assessed as strong for deposits without complications and noninflammatory nodules (combined 85%), moderate for abscesses (60%), fair for low-grade inflammations (32%), and slight for migrations (9%). Results from the MRI examinations aided in subsequent treatment decisions in 11% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Study results show that MRI may be useful for diagnosing complications associated with fillers that have migratory potential, for depiction of the extent of deposits before treatment, and for follow-up of low-grade inflammation and abscesses after surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Clinical data on injectable tissue fillers: a review

Treatment with injectable tissue fillers for aesthetic purposes is increasingly popular. In parallel with this success, questions related to the safety of these treatments and the products involved are being raised more prominently. To gain insight in the safety aspects of injectable tissue fillers, we performed a literature review to collect studies reporting clinical data of injectable tissue fillers. We found several case reports where serious complications after more than three years are described. However, there are only a limited number of well-defined prospective clinical studies available with follow-up periods longer than three years. Furthermore, causes of complications, that is, treatment or product related, are often not specified in literature. Considering the intended functional period of fillers in combination with the known occurrence of long-term complications, there is a need for well-defined prospective clinical studies. In order to be able to discriminate between product failure (a product safety issue) or application methodology (a physician expertise or training issue), better identification of observed complications and whether they are product or treatment related, is needed. For the safe use of the fillers it is important that treatment with injectable tissue fillers is performed by a trained physician, who knows the product specifications and its applications.

Complications of injectable fillers, part I

Dermal filling has rapidly become one of the most common procedures performed by clinicians worldwide. The vast majority of treatments are successful and patient satisfaction is high. However, complications, both mild and severe, have been reported and result from injection of many different types of dermal fillers. In this Continuing Medical Education review article, the author describes common technical errors, the signs and symptoms of both common and rare complications, and management of sequelae in clear, easily adaptable treatment algorithms.

Facial soft tissue augmentation with Artecoll(®): A review of eight years of clinical experience in 153 patients

OBJECTIVE

Artecoll (Canderm Pharma Inc, Canada) is a semipermanent, injectable, soft tissue filler composed of uniform polymethylmethacrylate microspheres in a bovine collagen gel, which has been used in Europe over the past decade. The authors review their experience using Artecoll as an injectable material for the correction of deep static folds of the face, improvement of nasal asymmetries following rhinoplasty, depressed acne scars and augmentation of the lip.

METHOD

A retrospective chart review, subjective patient satisfaction feedback and objective findings noted by the senior author were performed over an eight-year period. A total of 153 patients were treated with Artecoll injections; 74 underwent lip augmentation, 21 underwent deep nasolabial fold augmentation, eight underwent glabellar fold augmentation, 26 were treated for minor nasal dorsal irregularities and 24 were treated for depressed acne scars.

RESULTS

No early or delayed allergic responses were reported. Complications occurred most commonly with lip augmentation, in which 13.5% of patients noted significant noticeable bruising postinjection that resolved completely within one week, 51.3% had detectable implant on palpation, and 13.1% required further intervention with massage, steroid injection and/or local excision to correct for lumpiness. Sixty per cent of patients requiring further intervention responded successfully, while local excision was performed on the two patients who failed to respond after six months of massage and steroid therapy. Overall, a total of 11 patients (14.9%) had minor asymmetries or less than optimal results within the lip augmentation study group. Among other sites, the most common complaint was undercorrection of the fold or wrinkle.

CONCLUSION

Based on the authors' experience, Artecoll is a safe, viable option for long-term treatment of deep facial wrinkles, nasal asymmetry, hypoplastic or atrophic lips, and depressed acne scars, and the results have been accompanied by a high degree of patient satisfaction. Although the implant is often palpable, rarely does it cause significant visible lumps. Its use and applications as a semipermanent injectable agent certainly warrant further investigation.

Facial granulomas secondary to injection of semi-permanent cosmetic dermal filler containing acrylic hydrogel particles

Various reports of long-term complications with semi-permanent fillers, appearing several years after injections have created some concern about their long-term safety profile. We report a case of foreign body granuloma secondary to dermal filler containing a copolymer of the acrylic hydrogel particles, hydroxyethylmethacrylate and ethylmethacrylate, occurring 2 years after the injection. The foreign body granulomas could not be treated satisfactorily with intralesional steroids, and the patient required a surgical excision of her granulomas. The physical and psychological consequences to such patients can be quite devastating.

[Dermal fillers: types, indications, and complications]

There are many types of dermal fillers currently used for cosmetic and medical indications in routine clinical practice. Fillers can be classified as temporary, semipermanent, or permanent depending on the length of time the substance remains in tissue. They can also be classified by the composition of the product. Materials can be based on collagen (bovine, porcine, and human), hyaluronic acid, poly-L-lactic acid, calcium hydroxylapatite, polymethal methacrylates, and polyacrylamide gels, among others. Temporary fillers are the products most often used for cosmetic purposes, in particular hyaluronic acid. This is due to the ease of application of fillers based on this substance, the good results obtained, and their safety profile. This review presents an overview of the techniques used for the correct placement of dermal fillers and the most common clinical indications for these procedures. It also covers the nature, properties, and mechanisms of action of the principal temporary, semipermanent, and permanent dermal fillers as well as the indications for each type of material. Finally, we describe the most common complications encountered and their treatment.