A Randomized, Evaluator-Blinded, Multi-Centered Study to Compare Injectable Poly-D, L-Lactic Acid Versus Hyaluronic Acid for Nasolabial Fold Augmentation
Wenyun Ting,Yuming Chong,Xiao Long,Maoguo Shu,Haiying Wang,Jiuzuo Huang,Ang Zeng,Zhuanli Bai,Rui Wang,Xin Zhang,Hanying Wang,Jui-Yu Lin,Chuan-Yuan Lin,Mingzi Zhang,Nanze Yu,Xiaojun Wang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjae180
2024-08-23
Abstract:Background: Injectable poly-D, L-lactic acid (PDLLA), under the brand name of AestheFill (Chaeum Pharma GmbH, Berlin, Germany), is a biocompatible, biodegradable, and biostimulatory product used to correct soft tissue volume loss. Its efficacy and safety have not been fully studied in a large cohort. Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a novel dermal filler injectable poly-D, L-lactic acid. Methods: This is an evaluator-blinded, multi-centered, randomized controlled trial to compare the efficacy and safety of PDLLA versus hyaluronic acid in the correction of nasolabial fold. Two hundred and sixty patients with moderate to severe nasolabial fold were enrolled and randomized to treatment group (PDLLA) or control group (hyaluronic acid). Each patient received PDLLA or hyaluronic acid injection for nasolabial fold augmentation and followed up for 52 weeks. Wrinkle Severity Rating Scale (WSRS) and Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) were used to evaluate topical nasolabial fold augmentation and overall improvement, respectively. Results: At 24 weeks, 67.6% of patients in the PDLLA group had at least 1-grade improvement in WSRS, compared to 60.9% of patients in the control group with at least 1-grade improvement in WSRS (p<0.05). At each visit, PDLLA group showed more improvement from the baseline in WSRS than the control group. PDLLA was safe and well-tolerated with no severe adverse events. Conclusions: PDLLA shows non-inferior efficacy in correcting nasolabial fold compared to hyaluronic acid.