Superficial versus deep injections of the upper midface—A prospective interventional split‐face study

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundVarious injection algorithms have been proposed in the past which are in line with the three aesthetic principles: upper face first, lateral face first, and deep regions first. However, increasing evidence is provided that the upper midface can be targeted with superficial soft tissue filler injections alone too.ObjectiveTo investigate in a prospective split‐face study design whether superficial or deep upper midfacial injections provide superior aesthetic outcomes.MethodsA total of n = 20 study participants (100% females; age 43.95 (11.7) years; BMI 22.92 (2.6) kg/m2) were treated with superficial soft tissue filler injections on side of their face and deep injections on the contralateral side with a mean volume of 0.78 cc. Outcome was evaluated at 7 weeks follow‐up for midfacial, and lower facial volume, for medial and lateral facial skin vector displacement, and for improvement of nasolabial, crow's feet, and upper cheek fullness severity scores.ResultsNo adverse events related to safety or product tolerability were observed during the entire study period. All semiquantitative scores improved statistically significantly after the observational period (p < 0.001) but displayed no difference between the two applied injection techniques (p > 0.05).ConclusionThe results of this split‐face study revealed that both the superficial and the deep cannula injection technique for midface volumization statistically significantly improve the midfacial volume, reduce nasolabial fold and crow's feet severity. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two injection techniques when compared via semiquantitative and objective outcome evaluation after 7 weeks follow‐up.