Affiliation:
1. Clinical Research Unit Erevna Innovations Inc Westmount (Montreal) Quebec Canada
2. Department of Plastic Surgery McGill University, Montreal General Hospital Montreal Montreal Quebec Canada
3. Medical International Center Monaco (CMIM) Montreal Monaco
4. JSS Medical Research Saint‐Laurent (Montreal) Quebec Canada
Abstract
AbstractBackgroundHollowing of the infraorbital region represents a common concern among aesthetic patients. In the past decade, an increasing number of patients have resorted to noninvasive aesthetic procedures to treat these concerns. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety profile of infraorbital hyaluronic acid injections for aesthetic rejuvenation.MethodsThrough a systematic review and meta‐analysis of prospective clinical trials, investigators sought to answer the research question “Does the use of needle versus cannula during infraorbital HA injections result in the same incidence rate of adverse events?” The primary outcomes of interest were the incidence rates of ecchymosis and edema in subject groups treated with a needle or cannula.ResultsSubjects treated with needles had a statistically significant greater incidence rate of ecchymosis, compared to those treated with cannula. Conversely, subjects treated with cannula had a statistically significant greater incidence rate of edema, compared to those treated with needles.ConclusionsThe incidence rates of adverse events following the administration of hyaluronic acid injections in the infraorbital region vary depending on whether a needle or cannula is used; with needles being associated with a greater risk of ecchymosis and cannulas being associated with a greater risk of edema. These findings should be discussed with patients prior to treatment consultation. Finally, as with most techniques, it is usually prudent to develop expertise with one technique before using a second, especially in cases where both approaches can be used and have different adverse event profiles.