Abstract:Background: Synthetic injectable facial fillers with a permanent effect are widely atoxic and nonimmunogenic, but they differ with respect to composition and in chemical and biologic characteristics. Yet, they all act as foreign bodies in the tissues eliciting a host response that try to remove the gel. Inflammatory nodules may develop at the sites of injection-for some fillers, many years later, for others, not. Why is that? Methods: Biopsies were contributed by various plastic surgeons from Europe and Australia after requests were made at international congresses and workshops. The study was based on (a) 5 biopsies from unreactive tissue obtained at different times after injection of polyacrylamide hydrogel (Aquamid); (b) 28 biopsies from intermediate or late inflammatory nodules after injection of polyacrylamide hydrogel (Aquamid) (20 cases), a hyaluronic acid-polyhydroxyethylmethacrylate/ethylmethacrylate gel (Dermalive) (2 cases), and a gel consisting of polylactic acid in mannitol/carbomethoxycellulose (New-Fill) (6 cases); and (c) a review of the literature on adverse reactions after injection with permanent fillers. Results: Clinically unreactive tissues after injection with Aquamid showed modest or no host reaction. Inflammatory nodules showed an increased foreign body reaction and a bacterial infection after injection with Aquamid, and a combination of moderate foreign body reaction, fibrosis, and in some cases also bacterial infection after injection with Dermalive and New-Fill. According to the literature, inflammatory nodules occur no later than 1 year after injection with polyacrylamide hydrogel, but up to 6 years after injection of combination gels (Artecol), and up to 28 years after injection of silicone gel. Conclusions: Inflammatory nodules are likely to be caused by a low-grade infection maintained within a biogfilm surrounding the hydrophobic silicone gel and the combination gels. Aquamid gel may prevent formation of a biofilm through its high water-binding capacity, explaining why late inflammatory nodules are not seen after injection of this polyacrylamide hydrogel product.

Adverse reactions to polylactic acid injections in the periorbital area

Late Onset Foreign Body Reaction due to Poly-L-Lactic Acid Facial Injections for Cosmetic Purpose

[Facial rejuvenation using L-polylactic acid: about 298 successive cases]

Complications after Polyacrylamide Hydrogel Injection for Facial Soft-Tissue Augmentation in China

Adverse reactions to injectable soft tissue permanent fillers

Blepharoplasty Combined with Fat Grafting: A Treatment of Complications Following Polyacrylamide Hydrogel Injections in Tear Troughs

Retinal artery occlusion following cosmetic injection of poly-L-lactic acid

The biological basis for poly-l-lactic acid-induced augmentation

Surgery for Foreign Body Reactions due to Injectable Fillers

A Clinical Histology Study Evaluating the Biostimulatory Activity Longevity of Injectable Poly-L-Lactic Acid for Facial Rejuvenation

A Case of Visual Loss Following Injection of Poly-(L)-Lactic Acid Filler into the Right Forehead

Efficacy and Safety of Poly-l-Lactic Acid in Facial Aesthetics: A Systematic Review

Long-term Complications after Liquid Silicone Injection: A Case Report and Literature Review

Optimal Changes Seen in Patients After Treatment With Poly- l -Lactic Acid: A Retrospective Descriptive Study

Delayed Foreign Body Granulomas in the Orofacial Region after Hyaluronic Acid Injection

Clinical applications of a novel poly-L-lactic acid microsphere and hyaluronic acid suspension for facial depression filling and rejuvenation

Adverse reactions to dermal fillers: review

Evaluation and management of facial granuloma caused by various injection materials

Polylactic Acid-Based Polymers Used for Facial Rejuvenation: A Narrative Review

Biodegradable polymers and platelet-rich plasma causing visual impairment: a literature review

Periorbital Lumps After the Injection of Hyaluronic Acid of Forehead: A Complication of Facial Fillers