Subperiosteal injections during facial soft tissue filler injections-Is it possible?
facial anatomy
injections
layers of the face
soft tissue fillers
subperiosteal
Journal
Journal of cosmetic dermatology
ISSN: 1473-2165
Titre abrégé: J Cosmet Dermatol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101130964
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2020
Mar 2020
Historique:
received:
16
06
2019
accepted:
19
06
2019
pubmed:
17
7
2019
medline:
15
12
2020
entrez:
17
7
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
It can be hypothesized that safety during soft tissue filler injection could be enhanced if the product could be positioned between the periosteum and the bone surface i.e. subperiosteal. This study investigated the feasibilityof subperiosteal injections. We analysed 126 injection procedures performed in seven Caucasian body donors (4 males, 3 females) with a mean age of 75.29 ± 4.95 years [range: 70 - 87] and a mean body mass index of 23.53 ± 3.96 kg/m Cadaveric dissections of the injection sites showed that no product was located deep to the periosteum in any of the investigated regions. This indicates that all performed injection procedures positioned the product superficial to the periosteum (100%) with a zero-success rate of subperiosteal injections. In the setting of this cadaveric investigation, despite varying needle size and injection angle, subperiosteal injection could not be achieved. This indicates that the product can spread uncontrolled into more superficial layers yielding an increased risk for adverse aesthetic and vascular events.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
It can be hypothesized that safety during soft tissue filler injection could be enhanced if the product could be positioned between the periosteum and the bone surface i.e. subperiosteal.
AIM
OBJECTIVE
This study investigated the feasibilityof subperiosteal injections.
PATIENTS/METHODS
METHODS
We analysed 126 injection procedures performed in seven Caucasian body donors (4 males, 3 females) with a mean age of 75.29 ± 4.95 years [range: 70 - 87] and a mean body mass index of 23.53 ± 3.96 kg/m
RESULTS
RESULTS
Cadaveric dissections of the injection sites showed that no product was located deep to the periosteum in any of the investigated regions. This indicates that all performed injection procedures positioned the product superficial to the periosteum (100%) with a zero-success rate of subperiosteal injections.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
In the setting of this cadaveric investigation, despite varying needle size and injection angle, subperiosteal injection could not be achieved. This indicates that the product can spread uncontrolled into more superficial layers yielding an increased risk for adverse aesthetic and vascular events.
Substances chimiques
Dermal Fillers
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
590-595Informations de copyright
© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Références
American Society of Plastic Surgeons. 2018 National plastic surgery statistics. 2018. https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/News/Statistics/2018/plastic-surgery-statistics-report-2018.pdf. Accessed April 14, 2019.
Frank K, Koban K, Targosinski S, et al. The anatomy behind adverse events in hand volumizing procedures. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;141(5):650e-662e.
Tansatit T, Apinuntrum P, Phetudom T. A dark side of the cannula injections: how arterial wall perforations and emboli occur. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2017;41(1):221-227.
van Loghem J, Humzah D, Kerscher M. Cannula versus sharp needle for placement of soft tissue fillers: an observational cadaver study. Aesthetic Surg J. 2017;38(1):73-88.
Pavicic T, Frank K, Erlbacher K, et al. Precision in dermal filling: a comparison between needle and cannula when using soft tissue fillers. J Drugs Dermatol. 2017;16(9):866-872.
Pavicic T, Webb KL, Frank K, Gotkin RH, Tamura B, Cotofana S. Arterial wall penetration forces in needles versus cannulas. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019;143(3):504e-512e.
Huang H, Lin Y-S. A novel needle structure that can avoid intravascular injection of any filler. Plast Reconstr surgery Glob open. 2017;5(4):e1285.
Beleznay K, Carruthers J, Humphrey S, Carruthers A, Jones D. Update on avoiding and treating blindness from fillers: a recent review of the world literature. Aesthetic Surg J. 2019;39(6):662-674.
Beleznay K, Carruthers J, Humphrey S, Jones D. Avoiding and treating blindness from fillers. Dermatologic Surg. 2015;41(10):1097-1117.
Cho K-H, Dalla Pozza E, Toth G, Bassiri Gharb B, Zins JE. Pathophysiology study of filler-induced blindness. Aesthetic Surg J. 2019;39(1):96-106.
Ilyin SO, Kulichikhin VG, Malkin AY. The rheological characterisation of typical injection implants based on hyaluronic acid for contour correction. Rheol Acta. 2016;55(3):223-233.
Khan TT, Colon-Acevedo B, Mettu P, DeLorenzi C, Woodward JA. An anatomical analysis of the supratrochlear artery: considerations in facial filler injections and preventing vision loss. Aesthetic Surg J. 2017;37(2):203-208.
Urdiales-Gálvez F, Delgado NE, Figueiredo V, et al. Treatment of soft tissue filler complications: expert consensus recommendations. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2018;42(2):498-510.