LayerRx Mapping ID
115
Slot System
Featured Buckets
Featured Buckets Admin
Medscape Lead Concept
5000574

Upper Lip Anatomy, Mechanics of Local Flaps, and Considerations for Reconstruction

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 03/08/2021 - 23:27

The upper lip poses challenges during reconstruction. Distortion of well-defined anatomic structures, including the vermilion border, oral commissures, Cupid’s bow, and philtrum, leads to noticeable deformities. Furthermore, maintenance of upper and lower lip function is essential for verbal communication, facial expression, and controlled opening of the oral cavity.

Similar to a prior review focused on the lower lip,1 we conducted a review of the literature using the PubMed database (1976-2017) and the following search terms: upper lip, lower lip, anatomy, comparison, cadaver, histology, local flap, and reconstruction. We reviewed studies that assessed anatomic and histologic characteristics of the upper and the lower lips, function of the upper lip, mechanics of local flaps, and upper lip reconstruction techniques including local flaps and regional flaps. Articles with an emphasis on free flaps were excluded.

The initial search resulted in 1326 articles. Of these, 1201 were excluded after abstracts were screened. Full-text review of the remaining 125 articles resulted in exclusion of 85 papers (9 foreign language, 4 duplicates, and 72 irrelevant). Among the 40 articles eligible for inclusion, 12 articles discussed anatomy and histology of the upper lip, 9 examined function of the upper lip, and 19 reviewed available techniques for reconstruction of the upper lip.

In this article, we review the anatomy and function of the upper lip as well as various repair techniques to provide the reconstructive surgeon with greater familiarity with the local flaps and an algorithmic approach for upper lip reconstruction.

Anatomic Characteristics of the Upper Lip

The muscular component of the upper lip primarily is comprised of the orbicularis oris (OO) muscle divided into 2 distinct concentric components: pars peripheralis and pars marginalis.2,3 It is discontinuous in some individuals.4 Although OO is the primary muscle of the lower lip, the upper lip is remarkably complex. Orbicularis oris and 3 additional muscles contribute to upper lip function: depressor septi nasi, the alar portion of the nasalis, and levator labii superioris alaeque nasi (LLSAN).5

The modiolus, a muscular structure located just lateral to the commissures, serves as a convergence point for facial muscle animation and lip function while distributing contraction forces between the lips and face.6 It is imperative to preserve its location in reconstruction to allow for good functional and aesthetic outcomes.



The upper lip is divided into 3 distinct aesthetic subunits: the philtrum and 1 lateral subunit on each side.7,8 Its unique surface features include the Cupid’s bow, vermilion tubercle, and philtral columns. The philtral columns are created by the dermal insertion on each side of the OO, which originates from the modiolus, decussates, and inserts into the skin of the contralateral philtral groove.2,9-11 The OO has additional insertions into the dermis lateral to the philtrum.5 During its course across the midline, it decreases its insertions, leading to the formation and thinness of the philtral dimple.9 The philtral shape primarily is due to the intermingling of LLSAN and the pars peripheralis in an axial plane. The LLSAN enters superolateral to the ipsilateral philtral ridge and courses along this ridge to contribute to the philtral shape.2 Formation of the philtrum’s contour arises from the opposing force of both muscles pulling the skin in opposite directions.2,5 The vermilion tubercle arises from the dermal insertion of the pars marginalis originating from the ipsilateral modiolus and follows the vermilion border.2 The Cupid’s bow is part of the white roll at the vermilion-cutaneous junction produced by the anterior projection of the pars peripheralis.10 The complex anatomy of this structure explains the intricacy of lip reconstructions in this area.

 

 

Function of the Upper Lip

Although the primary purpose of OO is sphincteric function, the upper lip’s key role is coverage of dentition and facial animation.12 The latter is achieved through the relationship of multiple muscles, including levator labii superioris, levator septi nasi, risorius, zygomaticus minor, zygomaticus major, levator anguli oris, and buccinator.7,13-17 Their smooth coordination results in various facial expressions. In comparison, the lower lip is critical for preservation of oral competence, prevention of drooling, eating, and speech due to the actions of OO and vertical support from the mentalis muscle.1,18-22

Reconstructive Methods for the Upper Lip

Multiple options are available for reconstruction of upper lip defects, with the aim to preserve facial animation and coverage of dentition. When animation muscles are involved, restoring function is the goal, which can be achieved by placing sutures to reapproximate the muscle edges in smaller defects or anchor the remaining muscle edge to preserve deep structures in larger defects, respecting the vector of contraction and attempting simulation of the muscle function. Additionally, restoration of the continuity of OO also is important for good aesthetic and functional outcomes.

Janis23 proposed the rule of thirds to approach upper and lower lip reconstruction. Using these rules, we briefly analyze the available flaps focusing on animation, OO restoration, preservation of the modiolus position, and sensation for each (eTable).



The perialar crescentic flap, an advancement flap, can be utilized for laterally located partial-thickness defects affecting up to one-third of the upper lip, especially those adjacent to the alar base, as well as full-thickness defects affecting up to two-thirds of the upper lip.7,24 The OO continuity and position of the modiolus often are preserved, sensation is maintained, and muscles of animation commonly are unaffected by this flap, especially in partial-thickness defects. In males, caution should be exercised where non–hair-bearing skin of the cheek is advanced to the upper lip region. Other potential complications include obliteration of the melolabial crease and pincushioning.7



Nasolabial (ie, melolabial) flaps are suggested for repair of defects up to one-third of the upper lip, especially when the vermilion is unaffected, or in lateral defects with or without commissure involvement.7,24-28 This flap is based on the facial artery and may be used as a direct transposition, V-Y advancement, or island flap with good aesthetic and functional outcomes (Figure 1).29,30 There is limited literature regarding the effects on animation. However, it may be beneficial in avoiding microstomia, as regional tissue is transferred from the cheek area, maintaining upper lip length. Additionally, the location of the modiolus often is unaffected, especially when the flap is harvested above the level of the muscle, providing superior facial animation function. Flap design is critical in areas lateral to the commissure and over the modiolus, as distortion of its position can occur.26 Similar to crescentic advancement, it is important to exercise caution in male patients, as non–hair-bearing tissue can be transferred to the upper lip. Reported adverse outcomes of the nasolabial flap include a thin flat upper lip, obliteration of the Cupid’s bow, and hypoesthesia that may improve over time.30

Figure 1. A, A patient with a 2.6×2-cm wound of the right upper lip following Mohs micrographic surgery stage 1. B, The defect was repaired using a 17.5-cm2 advancement flap with musculocutaneous pedicle.


The Abbe flap is suitable for reconstruction of upper lip defects affecting up to two-thirds of the upper lip and lateral defects, provided the commissure or philtrum is unaffected.7,8 It is a 2-stage lip-switch flap based on the inferior labial artery, where tissue is harvested and transferred from the lower lip (Figure 2).23,31 It is particularly useful for philtral reconstruction, as incision lines at the flap edges can recreate the skin folds of the philtrum. Moreover, incision lines are better concealed under the nose, making it favorable for female patients. Surgeons should consider the difference in philtral width between sexes when designing this flap for optimal aesthetic outcome, as males have larger philtral width than females.21 The Abbe flap allows preservation of the Cupid’s bow, oral commissure, and modiolus position; however, it is an insensate flap and does not establish continuity of OO.23 For central defects, the function of animation muscles is not critically affected. In philtral reconstruction using an Abbe flap, a common adverse outcome is widening of the central segment because of tension and contraction forces applied by the adjacent OO. Restoration of the continuity of the muscle through dissection and advancement in small defects or anchoring of muscle edges on deeper surfaces may avoid direct pull on the flap. In larger central defects extending beyond the native philtrum, it is important to recreate the philtrum proportional to the remaining upper and lower lips. The recommended technique is a combination of a thin Abbe flap with bilateral perialar crescentic advancement flaps to maintain a proportional philtrum. Several variations have been described, including 3D planning with muscular suspension for natural raised philtral columns, avoiding a flat upper lip.5

Figure 2. An Abbe flap. A, Design. Obtains blood supply from the ipsilateral artery. B, Flap inset with pedicle in place. It is divided 14 to 21 days later. Illustrations courtesy of Joshua P. Hays, MD (Houston, Texas).

 

 



The Yu flap, a sensate single-stage rotational advancement flap, can be used in a variety of ways for repair of upper lip defects, depending on the size and location.26 Lateral defects up to one-half of the upper lip should be repaired with a unilateral reverse Yu flap, central defects up to one-half of the upper lip can be reconstructed with bilateral reverse Yu flaps, and defects up to two-thirds of the upper lip can be repaired with bilateral Yu flaps. This flap restores OO continuity and thus preserves sphincter function, minimizes oral incompetence, and has a low risk of microstomia. The muscles of facial animation are preserved, yet the modiolus is not. Good aesthetic outcomes have been reported depending on the location of the Yu flap because scars can be placed in the nasolabial sulcus, commissures, or medially to recreate the philtrum.26

The Estlander flap is a single-stage flap utilizing donor tissue from the opposing lip for reconstruction of lateral defects up to two-thirds of the upper lip with commissure and philtrum involvement (Figure 3).8,23,32 It is an insensate flap that alters the position of the modiolus, distorting oral and facial animation.23 The superomedial position of the modiolus is better tolerated in the upper lip because it increases the relaxation tone of the lower lip and simulates the vector of contraction of major animation muscles, positively impacting the sphincteric function of the reconstructed lip. Sphincteric function action is not as impaired compared with the lower lip because the new position of the modiolus tightens the lower lip and prevents drooling.33 When designing the flap, one should consider that the inferior labial artery has been reported to remain with 10 mm of the superior border of the lower lip; therefore, pedicles of the Abbe and Estlander flaps should be at least 10 mm from the vermilion border to preserve vascular supply.34,35

Figure 3. An Estlander flap. A, Design. Obtains blood supply from the contralateral labial artery. B, Flap inset and donor site closure. Illustrations courtesy of Joshua P. Hays, MD (Houston, Texas).


The Gilles fan flap, an insensate advancement rotation flap, can be employed for central and lateral full-thickness defects up to two-thirds of the upper lip not involving the commissures.8 It is a single-stage flap in which the remaining lip is redistributed and rotated to create a neocommissure, but it does not restore the philtrum. Given that increased adjacent tissue is available, there is a decreased risk for microstomia.12 Facial animation is impaired because of the altered position of the modiolus and disruption of animation muscles. Oral competency is abolished, as neurovascular structures are not preserved.7 Although it has been recommended for use in total upper lip reconstruction, caution should be exercised, as use in defects greater than two-thirds can displace the modiolus and create microstomia.7,36



The Karapandzic flap, a modified Gilles fan flap, can be employed for repair of central defects up to two-thirds of the upper lip.8,23,32,36-39 The bilateral advancement of full-thickness adjacent tissue edges preserves neurovascular structures allowing sensation and restores OO continuation.40 Prior studies have shown the average distance of the superior labial artery emergence from the facial artery and labial commissure is 12.1 mm; thus, at least 12.1 mm of tissue from the commissure should be preserved to prevent vascular compromise in Karapandzic flaps.34,35 The modiolus position is altered, and facial animation muscles are disrupted, consequently impairing facial animation, especially elevation of the lip.36 The philtrum is obliterated, producing unfavorable aesthetic outcomes. Finally, the upper lip is thinner and smaller in volume than the lower lip, increasing the risk for microstomia compared with the lower lip with a similar reconstructive technique.36

Defects larger than two-thirds of the upper lip require a Bernard Burrow flap, distant free flap, or combination of multiple regional and local flaps dependent on the characteristics of the defect.36,41 Distant free flaps are beyond the scope of this review. The Bernard Burrow flap consists of bilaterally opposing cheek advancement flaps. It is an insensate flap that does not restore OO continuity, producing minimal muscle function and poor animation. Microstomia is a common adverse outcome.36

Conclusion

Comprehensive understanding of labial anatomy and its intimate relationship to function and aesthetics of the upper lip are critical. Flap anatomy and mechanics are key factors for successful reconstruction. The purpose of this article is to utilize knowledge of histology, anatomy, and function of the upper lip to improve the outcomes of reconstruction. The Abbe flap often is utilized for reconstruction of the philtrum and central upper lip defects, though it is a less desirable option for lower lip reconstruction. The Karapandzic flap, while sensate and restorative of OO continuity, may have less optimal functional and cosmetic results compared with its use in the lower lip. Regarding lateral defects involving the commissure, the Estlander flap provides a reasonable option for the upper lip when compared with its use in lower lip defects, where outcomes are usually inferior.

References
  1. Boukovalas S, Boson AL, Hays JP, et al. A systematic review of lower lip anatomy, mechanics of local flaps, and special considerations for lower lip reconstruction. J Drugs Dermatol. 2017;16:1254-1261.
  2. Wu J, Yin N. Detailed anatomy of the nasolabial muscle in human fetuses as determined by micro-CT combined with iodine staining. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76:111-116.
  3. Pepper JP, Baker SR. Local flaps: cheek and lip reconstruction. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2013;15:374-382.
  4. Rogers CR, Weinberg SM, Smith TD, et al. Anatomical basis for apparent subepithelial cleft lip: a histological and ultrasonographic survey of the orbicularis oris muscle. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2008;45:518-524.
  5. Yin N, Wu D, Wang Y, et al. Complete philtrum reconstruction on the partial-thickness cross-lip flap by nasolabial muscle tension line group reconstruction in the same stage of flap transfer. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2017;19:496-501.
  6. Al-Hoqail RA, Abdel Meguid EM. An anatomical and analytical study of the modiolus: enlightening its relevance to plastic surgery. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2009;33:147-152.
  7. Galyon SW, Frodel JL. Lip and perioral defects. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2001;34:647-666.
  8. Massa AF, Otero-Rivas M, González-Sixto B, et al. Combined cutaneous rotation flap and myomucosal tongue flap for reconstruction of an upper lip defect. Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2014;105:869-871.
  9. Latham RA, Deaton TG. The structural basis of the philtrum and the contour of the vermilion border: a study of the musculature of the upper lip. J Anat. 1976;121:151-160.
  10. Garcia de Mitchell CA, Pessa JE, Schaverien MV, et al. The philtrum: anatomical observations from a new perspective. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;122:1756-1760.
  11. Bo C, Ningbei Y. Reconstruction of upper lip muscle system by anatomy, magnetic resonance imaging, and serial histological sections. J Craniofac Surg. 2014;25:48-54.
  12. Ishii LE, Byrne PJ. Lip reconstruction. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am. 2009;17:445-453.
  13. Hur MS, Youn KH, Hu KS, et al. New anatomic considerations on the levator labii superioris related with the nasal ala. J Craniofac Surg. 2010;21:258-260.
  14. Song R, Ma H, Pan F. The “levator septi nasi muscle” and its clinical significance. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002;109:1707-1712; discussion 1713.
  15. Choi DY, Hur MS, Youn KH, et al. Clinical anatomic considerations of the zygomaticus minor muscle based on the morphology and insertion pattern. Dermatol Surg. 2014;40:858-863.
  16. Youn KH, Park JT, Park DS, et al. Morphology of the zygomaticus minor and its relationship with the orbicularis oculi muscle. J Craniofac Surg. 2012;23:546-548.
  17. Vercruysse H, Van Nassauw L, San Miguel-Moragas J, et al. The effect of a Le Fort I incision on nose and upper lip dynamics: unraveling the mystery of the “Le Fort I lip.” J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016;44:1917-1921.
  18. Vinkka-Puhakka H, Kean MR, Heap SW. Ultrasonic investigation of the circumoral musculature. J Anat. 1989;166:121-133.
  19. Ferrario VF, Rosati R, Peretta R, et al. Labial morphology: a 3-dimensional anthropometric study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;67:1832-1839.
  20. Ferrario VF, Sforza C, Schmitz JH, et al. Normal growth and development of the lips: a 3-dimensional study from 6 years to adulthood using a geometric model. J Anat. 2000;196:415-423.
  21. Sforza C, Grandi G, Binelli M, et al. Age- and sex-related changes in three-dimensional lip morphology. Forensic Sci Int. 2010;200:182.e181-187.
  22. Wilson DB. Embryonic development of the head and neck: part 3, the face. Head Neck Surg. 1979;2:145-153.
  23. Janis JE, ed. Essentials of Plastic Surgery. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis Group; 2014.
  24. Burusapat C, Pitiseree A. Advanced squamous cell carcinoma involving both upper and lower lips and oral commissure with simultaneous reconstruction by local flap: a case report. J Med Case Rep. 2012;6:23.
  25. El-Marakby HH. The versatile naso-labial flaps in facial reconstruction. J Egypt Natl Canc Inst. 2005;17:245-250.
  26. Li ZN, Li RW, Tan XX, et al. Yu’s flap for lower lip and reverse Yu’s flap for upper lip reconstruction: 20 years experience. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;51:767-772.
  27. Wollina U. Reconstructive surgery in advanced perioral non-melanoma skin cancer. Results in elderly patients. J Dermatol Case Rep. 2014;8:103-107.
  28. Younger RA. The versatile melolabial flap. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1992;107:721-726.
  29. Włodarkiewicz A, Wojszwiłło-Geppert E, Placek W, et al. Upper lip reconstruction with local island flap after neoplasm excision. Dermatol Surg. 1997;23:1075-1079.
  30. Cook JL. The reconstruction of two large full-thickness wounds of the upper lip with different operative techniques: when possible, a local flap repair is preferable to reconstruction with free tissue transfer. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:281-289.
  31. Kriet JD, Cupp CL, Sherris DA, et al. The extended Abbé flap. Laryngoscope. 1995;105:988-992.
  32. Khan AA, Kulkarni JV. Karapandzic flap. Indian J Dent. 2014;5:107-109.
  33. Raschke GF, Rieger UM, Bader RD, et al. Lip reconstruction: an anthropometric and functional analysis of surgical outcomes. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;41:744-750.
  34. Maǧden O, Edizer M, Atabey A, et al. Cadaveric study of the arterial anatomy of the upper lip. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;114:355-359.
  35. Al-Hoqail RA, Meguid EM. Anatomic dissection of the arterial supply of the lips: an anatomical and analytical approach. J Craniofac Surg. 2008;19:785-794.
  36. Kim JC, Hadlock T, Varvares MA, et al. Hair-bearing temporoparietal fascial flap reconstruction of upper lip and scalp defects. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2001;3:170-177.
  37. Teemul TA, Telfer A, Singh RP, et al. The versatility of the Karapandzic flap: a review of 65 cases with patient-reported outcomes. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017;45:325-329.
  38. Matteini C, Mazzone N, Rendine G, et al. Lip reconstruction with local m-shaped composite flap. J Craniofac Surg. 2010;21:225-228.
  39. Williams EF, Setzen G, Mulvaney MJ. Modified Bernard-Burow cheek advancement and cross-lip flap for total lip reconstruction. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1996;122:1253-1258.
  40. Jaquet Y, Pasche P, Brossard E, et al. Meyer’s surgical procedure for the treatment of lip carcinoma. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2005;262:11-16.
  41. Dang M, Greenbaum SS. Modified Burow’s wedge flap for upper lateral lip defects. Dermatol Surg. 2000;26:497-498.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Drs. Boson, Cole, and Wagner are from The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston. Drs. Boson and Cole are from the Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, and Dr. Wagner is from the Department of Dermatology. Dr. Boukovalas is from the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, The University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Knoxville. Dr. Hays is from the Department of Emergency Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. Dr. Hammel is from Dermatology Specialists, Atlanta, Georgia.

The authors report no conflict of interest.

The eTable is available in the Appendix online at www.mdedge.com/dermatology.

Correspondence: Stefanos Boukovalas, MD, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, The University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Knoxville, TN 37920 ([email protected]).

Issue
cutis - 107(3)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
144-148, E1
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Drs. Boson, Cole, and Wagner are from The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston. Drs. Boson and Cole are from the Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, and Dr. Wagner is from the Department of Dermatology. Dr. Boukovalas is from the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, The University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Knoxville. Dr. Hays is from the Department of Emergency Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. Dr. Hammel is from Dermatology Specialists, Atlanta, Georgia.

The authors report no conflict of interest.

The eTable is available in the Appendix online at www.mdedge.com/dermatology.

Correspondence: Stefanos Boukovalas, MD, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, The University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Knoxville, TN 37920 ([email protected]).

Author and Disclosure Information

Drs. Boson, Cole, and Wagner are from The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston. Drs. Boson and Cole are from the Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, and Dr. Wagner is from the Department of Dermatology. Dr. Boukovalas is from the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, The University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Knoxville. Dr. Hays is from the Department of Emergency Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. Dr. Hammel is from Dermatology Specialists, Atlanta, Georgia.

The authors report no conflict of interest.

The eTable is available in the Appendix online at www.mdedge.com/dermatology.

Correspondence: Stefanos Boukovalas, MD, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, The University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Knoxville, TN 37920 ([email protected]).

Article PDF
Article PDF

The upper lip poses challenges during reconstruction. Distortion of well-defined anatomic structures, including the vermilion border, oral commissures, Cupid’s bow, and philtrum, leads to noticeable deformities. Furthermore, maintenance of upper and lower lip function is essential for verbal communication, facial expression, and controlled opening of the oral cavity.

Similar to a prior review focused on the lower lip,1 we conducted a review of the literature using the PubMed database (1976-2017) and the following search terms: upper lip, lower lip, anatomy, comparison, cadaver, histology, local flap, and reconstruction. We reviewed studies that assessed anatomic and histologic characteristics of the upper and the lower lips, function of the upper lip, mechanics of local flaps, and upper lip reconstruction techniques including local flaps and regional flaps. Articles with an emphasis on free flaps were excluded.

The initial search resulted in 1326 articles. Of these, 1201 were excluded after abstracts were screened. Full-text review of the remaining 125 articles resulted in exclusion of 85 papers (9 foreign language, 4 duplicates, and 72 irrelevant). Among the 40 articles eligible for inclusion, 12 articles discussed anatomy and histology of the upper lip, 9 examined function of the upper lip, and 19 reviewed available techniques for reconstruction of the upper lip.

In this article, we review the anatomy and function of the upper lip as well as various repair techniques to provide the reconstructive surgeon with greater familiarity with the local flaps and an algorithmic approach for upper lip reconstruction.

Anatomic Characteristics of the Upper Lip

The muscular component of the upper lip primarily is comprised of the orbicularis oris (OO) muscle divided into 2 distinct concentric components: pars peripheralis and pars marginalis.2,3 It is discontinuous in some individuals.4 Although OO is the primary muscle of the lower lip, the upper lip is remarkably complex. Orbicularis oris and 3 additional muscles contribute to upper lip function: depressor septi nasi, the alar portion of the nasalis, and levator labii superioris alaeque nasi (LLSAN).5

The modiolus, a muscular structure located just lateral to the commissures, serves as a convergence point for facial muscle animation and lip function while distributing contraction forces between the lips and face.6 It is imperative to preserve its location in reconstruction to allow for good functional and aesthetic outcomes.



The upper lip is divided into 3 distinct aesthetic subunits: the philtrum and 1 lateral subunit on each side.7,8 Its unique surface features include the Cupid’s bow, vermilion tubercle, and philtral columns. The philtral columns are created by the dermal insertion on each side of the OO, which originates from the modiolus, decussates, and inserts into the skin of the contralateral philtral groove.2,9-11 The OO has additional insertions into the dermis lateral to the philtrum.5 During its course across the midline, it decreases its insertions, leading to the formation and thinness of the philtral dimple.9 The philtral shape primarily is due to the intermingling of LLSAN and the pars peripheralis in an axial plane. The LLSAN enters superolateral to the ipsilateral philtral ridge and courses along this ridge to contribute to the philtral shape.2 Formation of the philtrum’s contour arises from the opposing force of both muscles pulling the skin in opposite directions.2,5 The vermilion tubercle arises from the dermal insertion of the pars marginalis originating from the ipsilateral modiolus and follows the vermilion border.2 The Cupid’s bow is part of the white roll at the vermilion-cutaneous junction produced by the anterior projection of the pars peripheralis.10 The complex anatomy of this structure explains the intricacy of lip reconstructions in this area.

 

 

Function of the Upper Lip

Although the primary purpose of OO is sphincteric function, the upper lip’s key role is coverage of dentition and facial animation.12 The latter is achieved through the relationship of multiple muscles, including levator labii superioris, levator septi nasi, risorius, zygomaticus minor, zygomaticus major, levator anguli oris, and buccinator.7,13-17 Their smooth coordination results in various facial expressions. In comparison, the lower lip is critical for preservation of oral competence, prevention of drooling, eating, and speech due to the actions of OO and vertical support from the mentalis muscle.1,18-22

Reconstructive Methods for the Upper Lip

Multiple options are available for reconstruction of upper lip defects, with the aim to preserve facial animation and coverage of dentition. When animation muscles are involved, restoring function is the goal, which can be achieved by placing sutures to reapproximate the muscle edges in smaller defects or anchor the remaining muscle edge to preserve deep structures in larger defects, respecting the vector of contraction and attempting simulation of the muscle function. Additionally, restoration of the continuity of OO also is important for good aesthetic and functional outcomes.

Janis23 proposed the rule of thirds to approach upper and lower lip reconstruction. Using these rules, we briefly analyze the available flaps focusing on animation, OO restoration, preservation of the modiolus position, and sensation for each (eTable).



The perialar crescentic flap, an advancement flap, can be utilized for laterally located partial-thickness defects affecting up to one-third of the upper lip, especially those adjacent to the alar base, as well as full-thickness defects affecting up to two-thirds of the upper lip.7,24 The OO continuity and position of the modiolus often are preserved, sensation is maintained, and muscles of animation commonly are unaffected by this flap, especially in partial-thickness defects. In males, caution should be exercised where non–hair-bearing skin of the cheek is advanced to the upper lip region. Other potential complications include obliteration of the melolabial crease and pincushioning.7



Nasolabial (ie, melolabial) flaps are suggested for repair of defects up to one-third of the upper lip, especially when the vermilion is unaffected, or in lateral defects with or without commissure involvement.7,24-28 This flap is based on the facial artery and may be used as a direct transposition, V-Y advancement, or island flap with good aesthetic and functional outcomes (Figure 1).29,30 There is limited literature regarding the effects on animation. However, it may be beneficial in avoiding microstomia, as regional tissue is transferred from the cheek area, maintaining upper lip length. Additionally, the location of the modiolus often is unaffected, especially when the flap is harvested above the level of the muscle, providing superior facial animation function. Flap design is critical in areas lateral to the commissure and over the modiolus, as distortion of its position can occur.26 Similar to crescentic advancement, it is important to exercise caution in male patients, as non–hair-bearing tissue can be transferred to the upper lip. Reported adverse outcomes of the nasolabial flap include a thin flat upper lip, obliteration of the Cupid’s bow, and hypoesthesia that may improve over time.30

Figure 1. A, A patient with a 2.6×2-cm wound of the right upper lip following Mohs micrographic surgery stage 1. B, The defect was repaired using a 17.5-cm2 advancement flap with musculocutaneous pedicle.


The Abbe flap is suitable for reconstruction of upper lip defects affecting up to two-thirds of the upper lip and lateral defects, provided the commissure or philtrum is unaffected.7,8 It is a 2-stage lip-switch flap based on the inferior labial artery, where tissue is harvested and transferred from the lower lip (Figure 2).23,31 It is particularly useful for philtral reconstruction, as incision lines at the flap edges can recreate the skin folds of the philtrum. Moreover, incision lines are better concealed under the nose, making it favorable for female patients. Surgeons should consider the difference in philtral width between sexes when designing this flap for optimal aesthetic outcome, as males have larger philtral width than females.21 The Abbe flap allows preservation of the Cupid’s bow, oral commissure, and modiolus position; however, it is an insensate flap and does not establish continuity of OO.23 For central defects, the function of animation muscles is not critically affected. In philtral reconstruction using an Abbe flap, a common adverse outcome is widening of the central segment because of tension and contraction forces applied by the adjacent OO. Restoration of the continuity of the muscle through dissection and advancement in small defects or anchoring of muscle edges on deeper surfaces may avoid direct pull on the flap. In larger central defects extending beyond the native philtrum, it is important to recreate the philtrum proportional to the remaining upper and lower lips. The recommended technique is a combination of a thin Abbe flap with bilateral perialar crescentic advancement flaps to maintain a proportional philtrum. Several variations have been described, including 3D planning with muscular suspension for natural raised philtral columns, avoiding a flat upper lip.5

Figure 2. An Abbe flap. A, Design. Obtains blood supply from the ipsilateral artery. B, Flap inset with pedicle in place. It is divided 14 to 21 days later. Illustrations courtesy of Joshua P. Hays, MD (Houston, Texas).

 

 



The Yu flap, a sensate single-stage rotational advancement flap, can be used in a variety of ways for repair of upper lip defects, depending on the size and location.26 Lateral defects up to one-half of the upper lip should be repaired with a unilateral reverse Yu flap, central defects up to one-half of the upper lip can be reconstructed with bilateral reverse Yu flaps, and defects up to two-thirds of the upper lip can be repaired with bilateral Yu flaps. This flap restores OO continuity and thus preserves sphincter function, minimizes oral incompetence, and has a low risk of microstomia. The muscles of facial animation are preserved, yet the modiolus is not. Good aesthetic outcomes have been reported depending on the location of the Yu flap because scars can be placed in the nasolabial sulcus, commissures, or medially to recreate the philtrum.26

The Estlander flap is a single-stage flap utilizing donor tissue from the opposing lip for reconstruction of lateral defects up to two-thirds of the upper lip with commissure and philtrum involvement (Figure 3).8,23,32 It is an insensate flap that alters the position of the modiolus, distorting oral and facial animation.23 The superomedial position of the modiolus is better tolerated in the upper lip because it increases the relaxation tone of the lower lip and simulates the vector of contraction of major animation muscles, positively impacting the sphincteric function of the reconstructed lip. Sphincteric function action is not as impaired compared with the lower lip because the new position of the modiolus tightens the lower lip and prevents drooling.33 When designing the flap, one should consider that the inferior labial artery has been reported to remain with 10 mm of the superior border of the lower lip; therefore, pedicles of the Abbe and Estlander flaps should be at least 10 mm from the vermilion border to preserve vascular supply.34,35

Figure 3. An Estlander flap. A, Design. Obtains blood supply from the contralateral labial artery. B, Flap inset and donor site closure. Illustrations courtesy of Joshua P. Hays, MD (Houston, Texas).


The Gilles fan flap, an insensate advancement rotation flap, can be employed for central and lateral full-thickness defects up to two-thirds of the upper lip not involving the commissures.8 It is a single-stage flap in which the remaining lip is redistributed and rotated to create a neocommissure, but it does not restore the philtrum. Given that increased adjacent tissue is available, there is a decreased risk for microstomia.12 Facial animation is impaired because of the altered position of the modiolus and disruption of animation muscles. Oral competency is abolished, as neurovascular structures are not preserved.7 Although it has been recommended for use in total upper lip reconstruction, caution should be exercised, as use in defects greater than two-thirds can displace the modiolus and create microstomia.7,36



The Karapandzic flap, a modified Gilles fan flap, can be employed for repair of central defects up to two-thirds of the upper lip.8,23,32,36-39 The bilateral advancement of full-thickness adjacent tissue edges preserves neurovascular structures allowing sensation and restores OO continuation.40 Prior studies have shown the average distance of the superior labial artery emergence from the facial artery and labial commissure is 12.1 mm; thus, at least 12.1 mm of tissue from the commissure should be preserved to prevent vascular compromise in Karapandzic flaps.34,35 The modiolus position is altered, and facial animation muscles are disrupted, consequently impairing facial animation, especially elevation of the lip.36 The philtrum is obliterated, producing unfavorable aesthetic outcomes. Finally, the upper lip is thinner and smaller in volume than the lower lip, increasing the risk for microstomia compared with the lower lip with a similar reconstructive technique.36

Defects larger than two-thirds of the upper lip require a Bernard Burrow flap, distant free flap, or combination of multiple regional and local flaps dependent on the characteristics of the defect.36,41 Distant free flaps are beyond the scope of this review. The Bernard Burrow flap consists of bilaterally opposing cheek advancement flaps. It is an insensate flap that does not restore OO continuity, producing minimal muscle function and poor animation. Microstomia is a common adverse outcome.36

Conclusion

Comprehensive understanding of labial anatomy and its intimate relationship to function and aesthetics of the upper lip are critical. Flap anatomy and mechanics are key factors for successful reconstruction. The purpose of this article is to utilize knowledge of histology, anatomy, and function of the upper lip to improve the outcomes of reconstruction. The Abbe flap often is utilized for reconstruction of the philtrum and central upper lip defects, though it is a less desirable option for lower lip reconstruction. The Karapandzic flap, while sensate and restorative of OO continuity, may have less optimal functional and cosmetic results compared with its use in the lower lip. Regarding lateral defects involving the commissure, the Estlander flap provides a reasonable option for the upper lip when compared with its use in lower lip defects, where outcomes are usually inferior.

The upper lip poses challenges during reconstruction. Distortion of well-defined anatomic structures, including the vermilion border, oral commissures, Cupid’s bow, and philtrum, leads to noticeable deformities. Furthermore, maintenance of upper and lower lip function is essential for verbal communication, facial expression, and controlled opening of the oral cavity.

Similar to a prior review focused on the lower lip,1 we conducted a review of the literature using the PubMed database (1976-2017) and the following search terms: upper lip, lower lip, anatomy, comparison, cadaver, histology, local flap, and reconstruction. We reviewed studies that assessed anatomic and histologic characteristics of the upper and the lower lips, function of the upper lip, mechanics of local flaps, and upper lip reconstruction techniques including local flaps and regional flaps. Articles with an emphasis on free flaps were excluded.

The initial search resulted in 1326 articles. Of these, 1201 were excluded after abstracts were screened. Full-text review of the remaining 125 articles resulted in exclusion of 85 papers (9 foreign language, 4 duplicates, and 72 irrelevant). Among the 40 articles eligible for inclusion, 12 articles discussed anatomy and histology of the upper lip, 9 examined function of the upper lip, and 19 reviewed available techniques for reconstruction of the upper lip.

In this article, we review the anatomy and function of the upper lip as well as various repair techniques to provide the reconstructive surgeon with greater familiarity with the local flaps and an algorithmic approach for upper lip reconstruction.

Anatomic Characteristics of the Upper Lip

The muscular component of the upper lip primarily is comprised of the orbicularis oris (OO) muscle divided into 2 distinct concentric components: pars peripheralis and pars marginalis.2,3 It is discontinuous in some individuals.4 Although OO is the primary muscle of the lower lip, the upper lip is remarkably complex. Orbicularis oris and 3 additional muscles contribute to upper lip function: depressor septi nasi, the alar portion of the nasalis, and levator labii superioris alaeque nasi (LLSAN).5

The modiolus, a muscular structure located just lateral to the commissures, serves as a convergence point for facial muscle animation and lip function while distributing contraction forces between the lips and face.6 It is imperative to preserve its location in reconstruction to allow for good functional and aesthetic outcomes.



The upper lip is divided into 3 distinct aesthetic subunits: the philtrum and 1 lateral subunit on each side.7,8 Its unique surface features include the Cupid’s bow, vermilion tubercle, and philtral columns. The philtral columns are created by the dermal insertion on each side of the OO, which originates from the modiolus, decussates, and inserts into the skin of the contralateral philtral groove.2,9-11 The OO has additional insertions into the dermis lateral to the philtrum.5 During its course across the midline, it decreases its insertions, leading to the formation and thinness of the philtral dimple.9 The philtral shape primarily is due to the intermingling of LLSAN and the pars peripheralis in an axial plane. The LLSAN enters superolateral to the ipsilateral philtral ridge and courses along this ridge to contribute to the philtral shape.2 Formation of the philtrum’s contour arises from the opposing force of both muscles pulling the skin in opposite directions.2,5 The vermilion tubercle arises from the dermal insertion of the pars marginalis originating from the ipsilateral modiolus and follows the vermilion border.2 The Cupid’s bow is part of the white roll at the vermilion-cutaneous junction produced by the anterior projection of the pars peripheralis.10 The complex anatomy of this structure explains the intricacy of lip reconstructions in this area.

 

 

Function of the Upper Lip

Although the primary purpose of OO is sphincteric function, the upper lip’s key role is coverage of dentition and facial animation.12 The latter is achieved through the relationship of multiple muscles, including levator labii superioris, levator septi nasi, risorius, zygomaticus minor, zygomaticus major, levator anguli oris, and buccinator.7,13-17 Their smooth coordination results in various facial expressions. In comparison, the lower lip is critical for preservation of oral competence, prevention of drooling, eating, and speech due to the actions of OO and vertical support from the mentalis muscle.1,18-22

Reconstructive Methods for the Upper Lip

Multiple options are available for reconstruction of upper lip defects, with the aim to preserve facial animation and coverage of dentition. When animation muscles are involved, restoring function is the goal, which can be achieved by placing sutures to reapproximate the muscle edges in smaller defects or anchor the remaining muscle edge to preserve deep structures in larger defects, respecting the vector of contraction and attempting simulation of the muscle function. Additionally, restoration of the continuity of OO also is important for good aesthetic and functional outcomes.

Janis23 proposed the rule of thirds to approach upper and lower lip reconstruction. Using these rules, we briefly analyze the available flaps focusing on animation, OO restoration, preservation of the modiolus position, and sensation for each (eTable).



The perialar crescentic flap, an advancement flap, can be utilized for laterally located partial-thickness defects affecting up to one-third of the upper lip, especially those adjacent to the alar base, as well as full-thickness defects affecting up to two-thirds of the upper lip.7,24 The OO continuity and position of the modiolus often are preserved, sensation is maintained, and muscles of animation commonly are unaffected by this flap, especially in partial-thickness defects. In males, caution should be exercised where non–hair-bearing skin of the cheek is advanced to the upper lip region. Other potential complications include obliteration of the melolabial crease and pincushioning.7



Nasolabial (ie, melolabial) flaps are suggested for repair of defects up to one-third of the upper lip, especially when the vermilion is unaffected, or in lateral defects with or without commissure involvement.7,24-28 This flap is based on the facial artery and may be used as a direct transposition, V-Y advancement, or island flap with good aesthetic and functional outcomes (Figure 1).29,30 There is limited literature regarding the effects on animation. However, it may be beneficial in avoiding microstomia, as regional tissue is transferred from the cheek area, maintaining upper lip length. Additionally, the location of the modiolus often is unaffected, especially when the flap is harvested above the level of the muscle, providing superior facial animation function. Flap design is critical in areas lateral to the commissure and over the modiolus, as distortion of its position can occur.26 Similar to crescentic advancement, it is important to exercise caution in male patients, as non–hair-bearing tissue can be transferred to the upper lip. Reported adverse outcomes of the nasolabial flap include a thin flat upper lip, obliteration of the Cupid’s bow, and hypoesthesia that may improve over time.30

Figure 1. A, A patient with a 2.6×2-cm wound of the right upper lip following Mohs micrographic surgery stage 1. B, The defect was repaired using a 17.5-cm2 advancement flap with musculocutaneous pedicle.


The Abbe flap is suitable for reconstruction of upper lip defects affecting up to two-thirds of the upper lip and lateral defects, provided the commissure or philtrum is unaffected.7,8 It is a 2-stage lip-switch flap based on the inferior labial artery, where tissue is harvested and transferred from the lower lip (Figure 2).23,31 It is particularly useful for philtral reconstruction, as incision lines at the flap edges can recreate the skin folds of the philtrum. Moreover, incision lines are better concealed under the nose, making it favorable for female patients. Surgeons should consider the difference in philtral width between sexes when designing this flap for optimal aesthetic outcome, as males have larger philtral width than females.21 The Abbe flap allows preservation of the Cupid’s bow, oral commissure, and modiolus position; however, it is an insensate flap and does not establish continuity of OO.23 For central defects, the function of animation muscles is not critically affected. In philtral reconstruction using an Abbe flap, a common adverse outcome is widening of the central segment because of tension and contraction forces applied by the adjacent OO. Restoration of the continuity of the muscle through dissection and advancement in small defects or anchoring of muscle edges on deeper surfaces may avoid direct pull on the flap. In larger central defects extending beyond the native philtrum, it is important to recreate the philtrum proportional to the remaining upper and lower lips. The recommended technique is a combination of a thin Abbe flap with bilateral perialar crescentic advancement flaps to maintain a proportional philtrum. Several variations have been described, including 3D planning with muscular suspension for natural raised philtral columns, avoiding a flat upper lip.5

Figure 2. An Abbe flap. A, Design. Obtains blood supply from the ipsilateral artery. B, Flap inset with pedicle in place. It is divided 14 to 21 days later. Illustrations courtesy of Joshua P. Hays, MD (Houston, Texas).

 

 



The Yu flap, a sensate single-stage rotational advancement flap, can be used in a variety of ways for repair of upper lip defects, depending on the size and location.26 Lateral defects up to one-half of the upper lip should be repaired with a unilateral reverse Yu flap, central defects up to one-half of the upper lip can be reconstructed with bilateral reverse Yu flaps, and defects up to two-thirds of the upper lip can be repaired with bilateral Yu flaps. This flap restores OO continuity and thus preserves sphincter function, minimizes oral incompetence, and has a low risk of microstomia. The muscles of facial animation are preserved, yet the modiolus is not. Good aesthetic outcomes have been reported depending on the location of the Yu flap because scars can be placed in the nasolabial sulcus, commissures, or medially to recreate the philtrum.26

The Estlander flap is a single-stage flap utilizing donor tissue from the opposing lip for reconstruction of lateral defects up to two-thirds of the upper lip with commissure and philtrum involvement (Figure 3).8,23,32 It is an insensate flap that alters the position of the modiolus, distorting oral and facial animation.23 The superomedial position of the modiolus is better tolerated in the upper lip because it increases the relaxation tone of the lower lip and simulates the vector of contraction of major animation muscles, positively impacting the sphincteric function of the reconstructed lip. Sphincteric function action is not as impaired compared with the lower lip because the new position of the modiolus tightens the lower lip and prevents drooling.33 When designing the flap, one should consider that the inferior labial artery has been reported to remain with 10 mm of the superior border of the lower lip; therefore, pedicles of the Abbe and Estlander flaps should be at least 10 mm from the vermilion border to preserve vascular supply.34,35

Figure 3. An Estlander flap. A, Design. Obtains blood supply from the contralateral labial artery. B, Flap inset and donor site closure. Illustrations courtesy of Joshua P. Hays, MD (Houston, Texas).


The Gilles fan flap, an insensate advancement rotation flap, can be employed for central and lateral full-thickness defects up to two-thirds of the upper lip not involving the commissures.8 It is a single-stage flap in which the remaining lip is redistributed and rotated to create a neocommissure, but it does not restore the philtrum. Given that increased adjacent tissue is available, there is a decreased risk for microstomia.12 Facial animation is impaired because of the altered position of the modiolus and disruption of animation muscles. Oral competency is abolished, as neurovascular structures are not preserved.7 Although it has been recommended for use in total upper lip reconstruction, caution should be exercised, as use in defects greater than two-thirds can displace the modiolus and create microstomia.7,36



The Karapandzic flap, a modified Gilles fan flap, can be employed for repair of central defects up to two-thirds of the upper lip.8,23,32,36-39 The bilateral advancement of full-thickness adjacent tissue edges preserves neurovascular structures allowing sensation and restores OO continuation.40 Prior studies have shown the average distance of the superior labial artery emergence from the facial artery and labial commissure is 12.1 mm; thus, at least 12.1 mm of tissue from the commissure should be preserved to prevent vascular compromise in Karapandzic flaps.34,35 The modiolus position is altered, and facial animation muscles are disrupted, consequently impairing facial animation, especially elevation of the lip.36 The philtrum is obliterated, producing unfavorable aesthetic outcomes. Finally, the upper lip is thinner and smaller in volume than the lower lip, increasing the risk for microstomia compared with the lower lip with a similar reconstructive technique.36

Defects larger than two-thirds of the upper lip require a Bernard Burrow flap, distant free flap, or combination of multiple regional and local flaps dependent on the characteristics of the defect.36,41 Distant free flaps are beyond the scope of this review. The Bernard Burrow flap consists of bilaterally opposing cheek advancement flaps. It is an insensate flap that does not restore OO continuity, producing minimal muscle function and poor animation. Microstomia is a common adverse outcome.36

Conclusion

Comprehensive understanding of labial anatomy and its intimate relationship to function and aesthetics of the upper lip are critical. Flap anatomy and mechanics are key factors for successful reconstruction. The purpose of this article is to utilize knowledge of histology, anatomy, and function of the upper lip to improve the outcomes of reconstruction. The Abbe flap often is utilized for reconstruction of the philtrum and central upper lip defects, though it is a less desirable option for lower lip reconstruction. The Karapandzic flap, while sensate and restorative of OO continuity, may have less optimal functional and cosmetic results compared with its use in the lower lip. Regarding lateral defects involving the commissure, the Estlander flap provides a reasonable option for the upper lip when compared with its use in lower lip defects, where outcomes are usually inferior.

References
  1. Boukovalas S, Boson AL, Hays JP, et al. A systematic review of lower lip anatomy, mechanics of local flaps, and special considerations for lower lip reconstruction. J Drugs Dermatol. 2017;16:1254-1261.
  2. Wu J, Yin N. Detailed anatomy of the nasolabial muscle in human fetuses as determined by micro-CT combined with iodine staining. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76:111-116.
  3. Pepper JP, Baker SR. Local flaps: cheek and lip reconstruction. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2013;15:374-382.
  4. Rogers CR, Weinberg SM, Smith TD, et al. Anatomical basis for apparent subepithelial cleft lip: a histological and ultrasonographic survey of the orbicularis oris muscle. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2008;45:518-524.
  5. Yin N, Wu D, Wang Y, et al. Complete philtrum reconstruction on the partial-thickness cross-lip flap by nasolabial muscle tension line group reconstruction in the same stage of flap transfer. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2017;19:496-501.
  6. Al-Hoqail RA, Abdel Meguid EM. An anatomical and analytical study of the modiolus: enlightening its relevance to plastic surgery. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2009;33:147-152.
  7. Galyon SW, Frodel JL. Lip and perioral defects. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2001;34:647-666.
  8. Massa AF, Otero-Rivas M, González-Sixto B, et al. Combined cutaneous rotation flap and myomucosal tongue flap for reconstruction of an upper lip defect. Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2014;105:869-871.
  9. Latham RA, Deaton TG. The structural basis of the philtrum and the contour of the vermilion border: a study of the musculature of the upper lip. J Anat. 1976;121:151-160.
  10. Garcia de Mitchell CA, Pessa JE, Schaverien MV, et al. The philtrum: anatomical observations from a new perspective. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;122:1756-1760.
  11. Bo C, Ningbei Y. Reconstruction of upper lip muscle system by anatomy, magnetic resonance imaging, and serial histological sections. J Craniofac Surg. 2014;25:48-54.
  12. Ishii LE, Byrne PJ. Lip reconstruction. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am. 2009;17:445-453.
  13. Hur MS, Youn KH, Hu KS, et al. New anatomic considerations on the levator labii superioris related with the nasal ala. J Craniofac Surg. 2010;21:258-260.
  14. Song R, Ma H, Pan F. The “levator septi nasi muscle” and its clinical significance. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002;109:1707-1712; discussion 1713.
  15. Choi DY, Hur MS, Youn KH, et al. Clinical anatomic considerations of the zygomaticus minor muscle based on the morphology and insertion pattern. Dermatol Surg. 2014;40:858-863.
  16. Youn KH, Park JT, Park DS, et al. Morphology of the zygomaticus minor and its relationship with the orbicularis oculi muscle. J Craniofac Surg. 2012;23:546-548.
  17. Vercruysse H, Van Nassauw L, San Miguel-Moragas J, et al. The effect of a Le Fort I incision on nose and upper lip dynamics: unraveling the mystery of the “Le Fort I lip.” J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016;44:1917-1921.
  18. Vinkka-Puhakka H, Kean MR, Heap SW. Ultrasonic investigation of the circumoral musculature. J Anat. 1989;166:121-133.
  19. Ferrario VF, Rosati R, Peretta R, et al. Labial morphology: a 3-dimensional anthropometric study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;67:1832-1839.
  20. Ferrario VF, Sforza C, Schmitz JH, et al. Normal growth and development of the lips: a 3-dimensional study from 6 years to adulthood using a geometric model. J Anat. 2000;196:415-423.
  21. Sforza C, Grandi G, Binelli M, et al. Age- and sex-related changes in three-dimensional lip morphology. Forensic Sci Int. 2010;200:182.e181-187.
  22. Wilson DB. Embryonic development of the head and neck: part 3, the face. Head Neck Surg. 1979;2:145-153.
  23. Janis JE, ed. Essentials of Plastic Surgery. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis Group; 2014.
  24. Burusapat C, Pitiseree A. Advanced squamous cell carcinoma involving both upper and lower lips and oral commissure with simultaneous reconstruction by local flap: a case report. J Med Case Rep. 2012;6:23.
  25. El-Marakby HH. The versatile naso-labial flaps in facial reconstruction. J Egypt Natl Canc Inst. 2005;17:245-250.
  26. Li ZN, Li RW, Tan XX, et al. Yu’s flap for lower lip and reverse Yu’s flap for upper lip reconstruction: 20 years experience. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;51:767-772.
  27. Wollina U. Reconstructive surgery in advanced perioral non-melanoma skin cancer. Results in elderly patients. J Dermatol Case Rep. 2014;8:103-107.
  28. Younger RA. The versatile melolabial flap. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1992;107:721-726.
  29. Włodarkiewicz A, Wojszwiłło-Geppert E, Placek W, et al. Upper lip reconstruction with local island flap after neoplasm excision. Dermatol Surg. 1997;23:1075-1079.
  30. Cook JL. The reconstruction of two large full-thickness wounds of the upper lip with different operative techniques: when possible, a local flap repair is preferable to reconstruction with free tissue transfer. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:281-289.
  31. Kriet JD, Cupp CL, Sherris DA, et al. The extended Abbé flap. Laryngoscope. 1995;105:988-992.
  32. Khan AA, Kulkarni JV. Karapandzic flap. Indian J Dent. 2014;5:107-109.
  33. Raschke GF, Rieger UM, Bader RD, et al. Lip reconstruction: an anthropometric and functional analysis of surgical outcomes. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;41:744-750.
  34. Maǧden O, Edizer M, Atabey A, et al. Cadaveric study of the arterial anatomy of the upper lip. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;114:355-359.
  35. Al-Hoqail RA, Meguid EM. Anatomic dissection of the arterial supply of the lips: an anatomical and analytical approach. J Craniofac Surg. 2008;19:785-794.
  36. Kim JC, Hadlock T, Varvares MA, et al. Hair-bearing temporoparietal fascial flap reconstruction of upper lip and scalp defects. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2001;3:170-177.
  37. Teemul TA, Telfer A, Singh RP, et al. The versatility of the Karapandzic flap: a review of 65 cases with patient-reported outcomes. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017;45:325-329.
  38. Matteini C, Mazzone N, Rendine G, et al. Lip reconstruction with local m-shaped composite flap. J Craniofac Surg. 2010;21:225-228.
  39. Williams EF, Setzen G, Mulvaney MJ. Modified Bernard-Burow cheek advancement and cross-lip flap for total lip reconstruction. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1996;122:1253-1258.
  40. Jaquet Y, Pasche P, Brossard E, et al. Meyer’s surgical procedure for the treatment of lip carcinoma. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2005;262:11-16.
  41. Dang M, Greenbaum SS. Modified Burow’s wedge flap for upper lateral lip defects. Dermatol Surg. 2000;26:497-498.
References
  1. Boukovalas S, Boson AL, Hays JP, et al. A systematic review of lower lip anatomy, mechanics of local flaps, and special considerations for lower lip reconstruction. J Drugs Dermatol. 2017;16:1254-1261.
  2. Wu J, Yin N. Detailed anatomy of the nasolabial muscle in human fetuses as determined by micro-CT combined with iodine staining. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76:111-116.
  3. Pepper JP, Baker SR. Local flaps: cheek and lip reconstruction. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2013;15:374-382.
  4. Rogers CR, Weinberg SM, Smith TD, et al. Anatomical basis for apparent subepithelial cleft lip: a histological and ultrasonographic survey of the orbicularis oris muscle. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2008;45:518-524.
  5. Yin N, Wu D, Wang Y, et al. Complete philtrum reconstruction on the partial-thickness cross-lip flap by nasolabial muscle tension line group reconstruction in the same stage of flap transfer. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2017;19:496-501.
  6. Al-Hoqail RA, Abdel Meguid EM. An anatomical and analytical study of the modiolus: enlightening its relevance to plastic surgery. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2009;33:147-152.
  7. Galyon SW, Frodel JL. Lip and perioral defects. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2001;34:647-666.
  8. Massa AF, Otero-Rivas M, González-Sixto B, et al. Combined cutaneous rotation flap and myomucosal tongue flap for reconstruction of an upper lip defect. Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2014;105:869-871.
  9. Latham RA, Deaton TG. The structural basis of the philtrum and the contour of the vermilion border: a study of the musculature of the upper lip. J Anat. 1976;121:151-160.
  10. Garcia de Mitchell CA, Pessa JE, Schaverien MV, et al. The philtrum: anatomical observations from a new perspective. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;122:1756-1760.
  11. Bo C, Ningbei Y. Reconstruction of upper lip muscle system by anatomy, magnetic resonance imaging, and serial histological sections. J Craniofac Surg. 2014;25:48-54.
  12. Ishii LE, Byrne PJ. Lip reconstruction. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am. 2009;17:445-453.
  13. Hur MS, Youn KH, Hu KS, et al. New anatomic considerations on the levator labii superioris related with the nasal ala. J Craniofac Surg. 2010;21:258-260.
  14. Song R, Ma H, Pan F. The “levator septi nasi muscle” and its clinical significance. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002;109:1707-1712; discussion 1713.
  15. Choi DY, Hur MS, Youn KH, et al. Clinical anatomic considerations of the zygomaticus minor muscle based on the morphology and insertion pattern. Dermatol Surg. 2014;40:858-863.
  16. Youn KH, Park JT, Park DS, et al. Morphology of the zygomaticus minor and its relationship with the orbicularis oculi muscle. J Craniofac Surg. 2012;23:546-548.
  17. Vercruysse H, Van Nassauw L, San Miguel-Moragas J, et al. The effect of a Le Fort I incision on nose and upper lip dynamics: unraveling the mystery of the “Le Fort I lip.” J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016;44:1917-1921.
  18. Vinkka-Puhakka H, Kean MR, Heap SW. Ultrasonic investigation of the circumoral musculature. J Anat. 1989;166:121-133.
  19. Ferrario VF, Rosati R, Peretta R, et al. Labial morphology: a 3-dimensional anthropometric study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;67:1832-1839.
  20. Ferrario VF, Sforza C, Schmitz JH, et al. Normal growth and development of the lips: a 3-dimensional study from 6 years to adulthood using a geometric model. J Anat. 2000;196:415-423.
  21. Sforza C, Grandi G, Binelli M, et al. Age- and sex-related changes in three-dimensional lip morphology. Forensic Sci Int. 2010;200:182.e181-187.
  22. Wilson DB. Embryonic development of the head and neck: part 3, the face. Head Neck Surg. 1979;2:145-153.
  23. Janis JE, ed. Essentials of Plastic Surgery. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis Group; 2014.
  24. Burusapat C, Pitiseree A. Advanced squamous cell carcinoma involving both upper and lower lips and oral commissure with simultaneous reconstruction by local flap: a case report. J Med Case Rep. 2012;6:23.
  25. El-Marakby HH. The versatile naso-labial flaps in facial reconstruction. J Egypt Natl Canc Inst. 2005;17:245-250.
  26. Li ZN, Li RW, Tan XX, et al. Yu’s flap for lower lip and reverse Yu’s flap for upper lip reconstruction: 20 years experience. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;51:767-772.
  27. Wollina U. Reconstructive surgery in advanced perioral non-melanoma skin cancer. Results in elderly patients. J Dermatol Case Rep. 2014;8:103-107.
  28. Younger RA. The versatile melolabial flap. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1992;107:721-726.
  29. Włodarkiewicz A, Wojszwiłło-Geppert E, Placek W, et al. Upper lip reconstruction with local island flap after neoplasm excision. Dermatol Surg. 1997;23:1075-1079.
  30. Cook JL. The reconstruction of two large full-thickness wounds of the upper lip with different operative techniques: when possible, a local flap repair is preferable to reconstruction with free tissue transfer. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:281-289.
  31. Kriet JD, Cupp CL, Sherris DA, et al. The extended Abbé flap. Laryngoscope. 1995;105:988-992.
  32. Khan AA, Kulkarni JV. Karapandzic flap. Indian J Dent. 2014;5:107-109.
  33. Raschke GF, Rieger UM, Bader RD, et al. Lip reconstruction: an anthropometric and functional analysis of surgical outcomes. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;41:744-750.
  34. Maǧden O, Edizer M, Atabey A, et al. Cadaveric study of the arterial anatomy of the upper lip. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;114:355-359.
  35. Al-Hoqail RA, Meguid EM. Anatomic dissection of the arterial supply of the lips: an anatomical and analytical approach. J Craniofac Surg. 2008;19:785-794.
  36. Kim JC, Hadlock T, Varvares MA, et al. Hair-bearing temporoparietal fascial flap reconstruction of upper lip and scalp defects. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2001;3:170-177.
  37. Teemul TA, Telfer A, Singh RP, et al. The versatility of the Karapandzic flap: a review of 65 cases with patient-reported outcomes. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017;45:325-329.
  38. Matteini C, Mazzone N, Rendine G, et al. Lip reconstruction with local m-shaped composite flap. J Craniofac Surg. 2010;21:225-228.
  39. Williams EF, Setzen G, Mulvaney MJ. Modified Bernard-Burow cheek advancement and cross-lip flap for total lip reconstruction. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1996;122:1253-1258.
  40. Jaquet Y, Pasche P, Brossard E, et al. Meyer’s surgical procedure for the treatment of lip carcinoma. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2005;262:11-16.
  41. Dang M, Greenbaum SS. Modified Burow’s wedge flap for upper lateral lip defects. Dermatol Surg. 2000;26:497-498.
Issue
cutis - 107(3)
Issue
cutis - 107(3)
Page Number
144-148, E1
Page Number
144-148, E1
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Article PDF Media

Dermatologic surgeons debut adverse event reporting database

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 03/02/2021 - 21:10

The American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association and the department of dermatology at Northwestern University, Chicago, have launched the Cutaneous Procedures Adverse Events Reporting (CAPER) registry.

Dr. Murad Alam

CAPER is a voluntary reporting system designed to collect reports of patients’ adverse events encountered during dermatologic surgery procedures, both cosmetic and those related to skin cancer. The goals of the CAPER registry are to provide safety monitoring, identify practice and/or education gaps associated with adverse events, and identify potential adverse event risk factors.

“CAPER is a registry overseen by a group of board-certified dermatologists, clinicians, and researchers with more than 20 years of experience in patient care and physician advocacy who are committed to improving safety outcomes,” according to an ASDSA press release. “The collaboration between Northwestern University and ASDSA will ensure that CAPER becomes the common place for dermatologic surgeons and their staff to report adverse events from devices, drugs or biologics.”

The launch of the database is important because it fills a gap in adverse event reporting, Murad Alam, MD, professor of dermatology and chief of cutaneous and aesthetic surgery in the department of dermatology at Northwestern University, said in an interview.

There has been no central registry specifically for reporting adverse events associated with dermatologic surgical procedures, including cosmetic and injectable treatments, he said. “While minimally invasive cosmetic and skin procedures have been proven to be exceedingly safe, this registry will provide an early warning system to identify any problems that do occur, so these can be addressed promptly. This registry will allow dermatologists, patients, and industry scientists to work together to further improve the safety of dermatologic procedures,” added Dr. Alam, the past ASDSA president, and current chair of the ASDSA’s Federal Affairs Work Group.



In addition, “recent reports of the possible interaction between some filler injections and certain COVID vaccines confirms the timeliness of redoubling our emphasis on safety. Dermatologists have always been at the forefront of maximizing the patient experience while minimizing risk; this registry is further evidence of that ongoing commitment,” he emphasized.

The CAPER database will gather information on a variety of dermatologic and cosmetic procedures, including those involving topicals and injectables (such as botulinum toxin, fillers, and chemical peels), devices (such as lasers and microneedling devices), cellular-based therapies (such as platelet-rich plasma and stem cell treatments), and surgical treatments (such as liposuction and hair transplantation), Dr. Alam said.

“Novel procedures, and those yet to be devised, as long as they relate to skin surgery or cosmetic improvement, will also be able to be reported. We encourage the reporting of all associated adverse events, even if it is not clear what caused the event. No dermatologic or cosmetic procedures will be excluded from reporting,” he added.

The purpose of the CAPER registry is “to help patients, physicians, and industry work collaboratively to ensure the highest levels of patient safety,” Dr. Alam continued. Data entered into the registry will be deidentified and will remain confidential, and as data on particular topics accumulate, the data “may be analyzed to better understand the patient experience and, secondly, to develop strategies to further improve safety,” he noted.

“One unique element of this registry is that it is focused on dermatologic and cosmetic procedures,” Dr. Alam added. “As a result, those managing and analyzing the data collected will be attuned to the particular concerns associated with such procedures and the patients receiving them.”

For more information and to report dermatologic surgery-related adverse events, go to caper.net.

Publications
Topics
Sections

The American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association and the department of dermatology at Northwestern University, Chicago, have launched the Cutaneous Procedures Adverse Events Reporting (CAPER) registry.

Dr. Murad Alam

CAPER is a voluntary reporting system designed to collect reports of patients’ adverse events encountered during dermatologic surgery procedures, both cosmetic and those related to skin cancer. The goals of the CAPER registry are to provide safety monitoring, identify practice and/or education gaps associated with adverse events, and identify potential adverse event risk factors.

“CAPER is a registry overseen by a group of board-certified dermatologists, clinicians, and researchers with more than 20 years of experience in patient care and physician advocacy who are committed to improving safety outcomes,” according to an ASDSA press release. “The collaboration between Northwestern University and ASDSA will ensure that CAPER becomes the common place for dermatologic surgeons and their staff to report adverse events from devices, drugs or biologics.”

The launch of the database is important because it fills a gap in adverse event reporting, Murad Alam, MD, professor of dermatology and chief of cutaneous and aesthetic surgery in the department of dermatology at Northwestern University, said in an interview.

There has been no central registry specifically for reporting adverse events associated with dermatologic surgical procedures, including cosmetic and injectable treatments, he said. “While minimally invasive cosmetic and skin procedures have been proven to be exceedingly safe, this registry will provide an early warning system to identify any problems that do occur, so these can be addressed promptly. This registry will allow dermatologists, patients, and industry scientists to work together to further improve the safety of dermatologic procedures,” added Dr. Alam, the past ASDSA president, and current chair of the ASDSA’s Federal Affairs Work Group.



In addition, “recent reports of the possible interaction between some filler injections and certain COVID vaccines confirms the timeliness of redoubling our emphasis on safety. Dermatologists have always been at the forefront of maximizing the patient experience while minimizing risk; this registry is further evidence of that ongoing commitment,” he emphasized.

The CAPER database will gather information on a variety of dermatologic and cosmetic procedures, including those involving topicals and injectables (such as botulinum toxin, fillers, and chemical peels), devices (such as lasers and microneedling devices), cellular-based therapies (such as platelet-rich plasma and stem cell treatments), and surgical treatments (such as liposuction and hair transplantation), Dr. Alam said.

“Novel procedures, and those yet to be devised, as long as they relate to skin surgery or cosmetic improvement, will also be able to be reported. We encourage the reporting of all associated adverse events, even if it is not clear what caused the event. No dermatologic or cosmetic procedures will be excluded from reporting,” he added.

The purpose of the CAPER registry is “to help patients, physicians, and industry work collaboratively to ensure the highest levels of patient safety,” Dr. Alam continued. Data entered into the registry will be deidentified and will remain confidential, and as data on particular topics accumulate, the data “may be analyzed to better understand the patient experience and, secondly, to develop strategies to further improve safety,” he noted.

“One unique element of this registry is that it is focused on dermatologic and cosmetic procedures,” Dr. Alam added. “As a result, those managing and analyzing the data collected will be attuned to the particular concerns associated with such procedures and the patients receiving them.”

For more information and to report dermatologic surgery-related adverse events, go to caper.net.

The American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association and the department of dermatology at Northwestern University, Chicago, have launched the Cutaneous Procedures Adverse Events Reporting (CAPER) registry.

Dr. Murad Alam

CAPER is a voluntary reporting system designed to collect reports of patients’ adverse events encountered during dermatologic surgery procedures, both cosmetic and those related to skin cancer. The goals of the CAPER registry are to provide safety monitoring, identify practice and/or education gaps associated with adverse events, and identify potential adverse event risk factors.

“CAPER is a registry overseen by a group of board-certified dermatologists, clinicians, and researchers with more than 20 years of experience in patient care and physician advocacy who are committed to improving safety outcomes,” according to an ASDSA press release. “The collaboration between Northwestern University and ASDSA will ensure that CAPER becomes the common place for dermatologic surgeons and their staff to report adverse events from devices, drugs or biologics.”

The launch of the database is important because it fills a gap in adverse event reporting, Murad Alam, MD, professor of dermatology and chief of cutaneous and aesthetic surgery in the department of dermatology at Northwestern University, said in an interview.

There has been no central registry specifically for reporting adverse events associated with dermatologic surgical procedures, including cosmetic and injectable treatments, he said. “While minimally invasive cosmetic and skin procedures have been proven to be exceedingly safe, this registry will provide an early warning system to identify any problems that do occur, so these can be addressed promptly. This registry will allow dermatologists, patients, and industry scientists to work together to further improve the safety of dermatologic procedures,” added Dr. Alam, the past ASDSA president, and current chair of the ASDSA’s Federal Affairs Work Group.



In addition, “recent reports of the possible interaction between some filler injections and certain COVID vaccines confirms the timeliness of redoubling our emphasis on safety. Dermatologists have always been at the forefront of maximizing the patient experience while minimizing risk; this registry is further evidence of that ongoing commitment,” he emphasized.

The CAPER database will gather information on a variety of dermatologic and cosmetic procedures, including those involving topicals and injectables (such as botulinum toxin, fillers, and chemical peels), devices (such as lasers and microneedling devices), cellular-based therapies (such as platelet-rich plasma and stem cell treatments), and surgical treatments (such as liposuction and hair transplantation), Dr. Alam said.

“Novel procedures, and those yet to be devised, as long as they relate to skin surgery or cosmetic improvement, will also be able to be reported. We encourage the reporting of all associated adverse events, even if it is not clear what caused the event. No dermatologic or cosmetic procedures will be excluded from reporting,” he added.

The purpose of the CAPER registry is “to help patients, physicians, and industry work collaboratively to ensure the highest levels of patient safety,” Dr. Alam continued. Data entered into the registry will be deidentified and will remain confidential, and as data on particular topics accumulate, the data “may be analyzed to better understand the patient experience and, secondly, to develop strategies to further improve safety,” he noted.

“One unique element of this registry is that it is focused on dermatologic and cosmetic procedures,” Dr. Alam added. “As a result, those managing and analyzing the data collected will be attuned to the particular concerns associated with such procedures and the patients receiving them.”

For more information and to report dermatologic surgery-related adverse events, go to caper.net.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer

ASDS issues first filler safety recommendations

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 03/01/2021 - 10:55

The American Society for Dermatologic Surgery (ASDS) addresses a worrying knowledge gap with the publication of its first evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and treatment of adverse events from injectable fillers.

The recommendations, published in the February issue of Dermatologic Surgery, are from a multidisciplinary task force convened by the ASDS, comprising 11 physicians – 8 board-certified in dermatology, 2 board-certified in plastic and reconstructive surgery, and 1 board-certified in oculoplastic surgery (all ASDS members) – and 2 patient representatives.

While redness, swelling, and other injection site reactions associated with injectable fillers are common, and usually resolve within 1-2 weeks, “rare but more serious adverse events from injectable fillers include vascular occlusion leading to skin necrosis or blindness, inflammatory events, and nodule formation, among others,” the authors wrote. They are “likely underreported” and cases are increasing as injectable fillers become more popular.

Derek Jones, MD, Skin Care and Laser Physicians of Beverly Hills, Calif.


“Truthfully, a lot of people don’t know what they’re doing,” lead author Derek Jones, MD, of Skin Care and Laser Physicians of Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, said in an interview. Worldwide, he said that the absolute number of injectable filler treatments “has exploded,” particularly in the United States – and over the last decade. Moreover, “a lot of these treatments are being relegated to the nurse practitioner or the registered nurse who may take a weekend course,” he added. “There is this lack of knowledge and lack of recognition of some of these basic principles that we are publishing.”

About half of the document focuses on the potentially devastating complications of filler embolization and vascular occlusion of facial arteries, which include tissue ischemia, necrosis, visual abnormalities, blindness, and stroke. While these complications are considered rare, there is actually little information on their prevalence, Dr. Jones pointed out. “We think there is massive underreporting … so we view it as just the tip of the iceberg.”

Almost 200 unique cases of injection-related visual compromise (IRVC) have been reported in the literature, but not enough to provide strong evidence-based treatment protocols, he said.

“There are really no randomized clinical trials on how to treat them – they’re just not common enough – but there’s still some very good evidence that points the way. Most of what we’re relying on is in that low- to moderate-certainty range, but nevertheless, it points in a direction most of us can hang our hat on.”



He described the two most important cornerstones for preventing vascular occlusion. The first, he said, is “having impeccable knowledge and understanding of vascular anatomy and the cutaneous landmarks for blood vessels that are at risk.” The second pertains to injection techniques, he said, noting that “it’s becoming clearer – although it’s somewhat controversial – that cannulas are safer than needles.”

While anatomical knowledge might seem like the most basic requirement for practitioners who inject fillers, Dr. Jones said it is not. “It is true that we study anatomy in great detail in medical school, but injection anatomy is a completely different bird. Of course someone can study the facial arteries and have a basic understanding, but understanding it in a way that it relates to safe filler injections is a completely different thing. Our understanding of this has evolved over the last couple of decades ... and there are new papers that come out all the time that refine our knowledge.”

In terms of treating an IRVC resulting from hyaluronic acid (HA) filler, “the take-home point is the hyaluronidase is the mainstay of treatment, and not a little bit of hyaluronidase, but a lot of hyaluronidase – hundreds of units injected into the area of ischemia,” he said. However, while the new guidelines emphasize that time is of the essence – “the most cited window of time for reperfusion is 90 minutes” – the authors also strongly advise practitioners to evaluate immediate post-event visual status first, before attempting any intervention.

Dr. Jones said the goal is to untangle some confusion about whether it is the filler or the rescue that does more damage. “There is a lot of controversy with ophthalmology, ophthalmologic surgeons, plastic surgeons, and dermatologists,” he said, and “there has been finger-pointing between specialists when people make an intervention … that the actual rescue procedure created the problem,” which is why “it is imperative to document the visual status prior to doing anything.”

Beyond IRVC, and nonvisual skin ischemia due to vascular occlusion, the document addresses prevention and treatment of nodules, both inflammatory and noninflammatory, that occur either early or more than a month after treatment with HA fillers, as well with semi-permanent and permanent fillers.

For HA-related nodules, “the mainstay of treatment is steroids – either oral or intralesional – antibiotics, and hyaluronidase, which erases the substance,” said Dr. Jones. As for nodules related to permanent fillers, he said that they are difficult to treat, and “tend to respond best to repetitive monthly injections of 5-fluououracil combined with small amounts of triamcinolone.”

Dr. Jones is an investigator or consultant for Allergan, Galderma, Merz, and Revance; other authors had disclosures that included serving as a consultant, investigator, and/or trainer for these and/or other companies; one author received partial funding from ASDS to do this work; and one author had no disclosures.

Publications
Topics
Sections

The American Society for Dermatologic Surgery (ASDS) addresses a worrying knowledge gap with the publication of its first evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and treatment of adverse events from injectable fillers.

The recommendations, published in the February issue of Dermatologic Surgery, are from a multidisciplinary task force convened by the ASDS, comprising 11 physicians – 8 board-certified in dermatology, 2 board-certified in plastic and reconstructive surgery, and 1 board-certified in oculoplastic surgery (all ASDS members) – and 2 patient representatives.

While redness, swelling, and other injection site reactions associated with injectable fillers are common, and usually resolve within 1-2 weeks, “rare but more serious adverse events from injectable fillers include vascular occlusion leading to skin necrosis or blindness, inflammatory events, and nodule formation, among others,” the authors wrote. They are “likely underreported” and cases are increasing as injectable fillers become more popular.

Derek Jones, MD, Skin Care and Laser Physicians of Beverly Hills, Calif.


“Truthfully, a lot of people don’t know what they’re doing,” lead author Derek Jones, MD, of Skin Care and Laser Physicians of Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, said in an interview. Worldwide, he said that the absolute number of injectable filler treatments “has exploded,” particularly in the United States – and over the last decade. Moreover, “a lot of these treatments are being relegated to the nurse practitioner or the registered nurse who may take a weekend course,” he added. “There is this lack of knowledge and lack of recognition of some of these basic principles that we are publishing.”

About half of the document focuses on the potentially devastating complications of filler embolization and vascular occlusion of facial arteries, which include tissue ischemia, necrosis, visual abnormalities, blindness, and stroke. While these complications are considered rare, there is actually little information on their prevalence, Dr. Jones pointed out. “We think there is massive underreporting … so we view it as just the tip of the iceberg.”

Almost 200 unique cases of injection-related visual compromise (IRVC) have been reported in the literature, but not enough to provide strong evidence-based treatment protocols, he said.

“There are really no randomized clinical trials on how to treat them – they’re just not common enough – but there’s still some very good evidence that points the way. Most of what we’re relying on is in that low- to moderate-certainty range, but nevertheless, it points in a direction most of us can hang our hat on.”



He described the two most important cornerstones for preventing vascular occlusion. The first, he said, is “having impeccable knowledge and understanding of vascular anatomy and the cutaneous landmarks for blood vessels that are at risk.” The second pertains to injection techniques, he said, noting that “it’s becoming clearer – although it’s somewhat controversial – that cannulas are safer than needles.”

While anatomical knowledge might seem like the most basic requirement for practitioners who inject fillers, Dr. Jones said it is not. “It is true that we study anatomy in great detail in medical school, but injection anatomy is a completely different bird. Of course someone can study the facial arteries and have a basic understanding, but understanding it in a way that it relates to safe filler injections is a completely different thing. Our understanding of this has evolved over the last couple of decades ... and there are new papers that come out all the time that refine our knowledge.”

In terms of treating an IRVC resulting from hyaluronic acid (HA) filler, “the take-home point is the hyaluronidase is the mainstay of treatment, and not a little bit of hyaluronidase, but a lot of hyaluronidase – hundreds of units injected into the area of ischemia,” he said. However, while the new guidelines emphasize that time is of the essence – “the most cited window of time for reperfusion is 90 minutes” – the authors also strongly advise practitioners to evaluate immediate post-event visual status first, before attempting any intervention.

Dr. Jones said the goal is to untangle some confusion about whether it is the filler or the rescue that does more damage. “There is a lot of controversy with ophthalmology, ophthalmologic surgeons, plastic surgeons, and dermatologists,” he said, and “there has been finger-pointing between specialists when people make an intervention … that the actual rescue procedure created the problem,” which is why “it is imperative to document the visual status prior to doing anything.”

Beyond IRVC, and nonvisual skin ischemia due to vascular occlusion, the document addresses prevention and treatment of nodules, both inflammatory and noninflammatory, that occur either early or more than a month after treatment with HA fillers, as well with semi-permanent and permanent fillers.

For HA-related nodules, “the mainstay of treatment is steroids – either oral or intralesional – antibiotics, and hyaluronidase, which erases the substance,” said Dr. Jones. As for nodules related to permanent fillers, he said that they are difficult to treat, and “tend to respond best to repetitive monthly injections of 5-fluououracil combined with small amounts of triamcinolone.”

Dr. Jones is an investigator or consultant for Allergan, Galderma, Merz, and Revance; other authors had disclosures that included serving as a consultant, investigator, and/or trainer for these and/or other companies; one author received partial funding from ASDS to do this work; and one author had no disclosures.

The American Society for Dermatologic Surgery (ASDS) addresses a worrying knowledge gap with the publication of its first evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and treatment of adverse events from injectable fillers.

The recommendations, published in the February issue of Dermatologic Surgery, are from a multidisciplinary task force convened by the ASDS, comprising 11 physicians – 8 board-certified in dermatology, 2 board-certified in plastic and reconstructive surgery, and 1 board-certified in oculoplastic surgery (all ASDS members) – and 2 patient representatives.

While redness, swelling, and other injection site reactions associated with injectable fillers are common, and usually resolve within 1-2 weeks, “rare but more serious adverse events from injectable fillers include vascular occlusion leading to skin necrosis or blindness, inflammatory events, and nodule formation, among others,” the authors wrote. They are “likely underreported” and cases are increasing as injectable fillers become more popular.

Derek Jones, MD, Skin Care and Laser Physicians of Beverly Hills, Calif.


“Truthfully, a lot of people don’t know what they’re doing,” lead author Derek Jones, MD, of Skin Care and Laser Physicians of Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, said in an interview. Worldwide, he said that the absolute number of injectable filler treatments “has exploded,” particularly in the United States – and over the last decade. Moreover, “a lot of these treatments are being relegated to the nurse practitioner or the registered nurse who may take a weekend course,” he added. “There is this lack of knowledge and lack of recognition of some of these basic principles that we are publishing.”

About half of the document focuses on the potentially devastating complications of filler embolization and vascular occlusion of facial arteries, which include tissue ischemia, necrosis, visual abnormalities, blindness, and stroke. While these complications are considered rare, there is actually little information on their prevalence, Dr. Jones pointed out. “We think there is massive underreporting … so we view it as just the tip of the iceberg.”

Almost 200 unique cases of injection-related visual compromise (IRVC) have been reported in the literature, but not enough to provide strong evidence-based treatment protocols, he said.

“There are really no randomized clinical trials on how to treat them – they’re just not common enough – but there’s still some very good evidence that points the way. Most of what we’re relying on is in that low- to moderate-certainty range, but nevertheless, it points in a direction most of us can hang our hat on.”



He described the two most important cornerstones for preventing vascular occlusion. The first, he said, is “having impeccable knowledge and understanding of vascular anatomy and the cutaneous landmarks for blood vessels that are at risk.” The second pertains to injection techniques, he said, noting that “it’s becoming clearer – although it’s somewhat controversial – that cannulas are safer than needles.”

While anatomical knowledge might seem like the most basic requirement for practitioners who inject fillers, Dr. Jones said it is not. “It is true that we study anatomy in great detail in medical school, but injection anatomy is a completely different bird. Of course someone can study the facial arteries and have a basic understanding, but understanding it in a way that it relates to safe filler injections is a completely different thing. Our understanding of this has evolved over the last couple of decades ... and there are new papers that come out all the time that refine our knowledge.”

In terms of treating an IRVC resulting from hyaluronic acid (HA) filler, “the take-home point is the hyaluronidase is the mainstay of treatment, and not a little bit of hyaluronidase, but a lot of hyaluronidase – hundreds of units injected into the area of ischemia,” he said. However, while the new guidelines emphasize that time is of the essence – “the most cited window of time for reperfusion is 90 minutes” – the authors also strongly advise practitioners to evaluate immediate post-event visual status first, before attempting any intervention.

Dr. Jones said the goal is to untangle some confusion about whether it is the filler or the rescue that does more damage. “There is a lot of controversy with ophthalmology, ophthalmologic surgeons, plastic surgeons, and dermatologists,” he said, and “there has been finger-pointing between specialists when people make an intervention … that the actual rescue procedure created the problem,” which is why “it is imperative to document the visual status prior to doing anything.”

Beyond IRVC, and nonvisual skin ischemia due to vascular occlusion, the document addresses prevention and treatment of nodules, both inflammatory and noninflammatory, that occur either early or more than a month after treatment with HA fillers, as well with semi-permanent and permanent fillers.

For HA-related nodules, “the mainstay of treatment is steroids – either oral or intralesional – antibiotics, and hyaluronidase, which erases the substance,” said Dr. Jones. As for nodules related to permanent fillers, he said that they are difficult to treat, and “tend to respond best to repetitive monthly injections of 5-fluououracil combined with small amounts of triamcinolone.”

Dr. Jones is an investigator or consultant for Allergan, Galderma, Merz, and Revance; other authors had disclosures that included serving as a consultant, investigator, and/or trainer for these and/or other companies; one author received partial funding from ASDS to do this work; and one author had no disclosures.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer

What’s best for filler injection, needle or cannula?

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 02/24/2021 - 14:22

Many dermatologists favor using either needles or cannulas for dermal filler treatments, but there’s a role for both instruments, according to Terrence Keaney, MD.

FlamingoImages/iStock/Getty Images

“You may be a needle person or a cannula person, but it doesn’t have to be that way,” he said during the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference. “There are pros and cons of both techniques, but I think there’s a place for both.”

Dr. Terrence Keaney


With a sharp needle, placement of the tip is considered precise, especially when delivering a supraperiosteal injection. “From a learning curve, especially for us as dermatologists, it’s easier because we’re used to injecting lidocaine, and we’re using needles on a day-to-day basis for injectables and other applications,” said Dr. Keaney, a dermatologist who is founder and director of SkinDC in Arlington, Va. “However, use of a needle is traumatic; it creates an increased risk of bruising and we’re cutting through tissue. We can potentially puncture a blood vessel and create a vascular event.”

Clinicians may consider filler delivery by sharp needle as being more precise, but in an observational cadaver study of cannula vs. sharp needle for placement of tissue fillers, investigators found an increased risk for spread of filler to more superficial layers along the needle trajectory, as well as a higher risk of intra-arterial injection. “This may explain why, when you’re injecting on a tear trough, you may still get some swelling in the area,” Dr. Keaney said. “You may see some swelling and some product, because it’s tracking along the injection point. One can argue that you can reduce this risk by using a longer needle or cannula.”

With a longer cannula, the blunt tips may act to displace blood vessels rather than to lacerate them. “They allow for greater coverage through fewer injection points and they approach the injection site at a more oblique angle, so it’s harder for the product to track,” he explained. “Cannula patients tend to faint on me a lot more than my needle patients do, so while the cannula may be more comfortable, it can be more nerve-wracking for patients.”

Recent studies have shown that with cannula proficiency, clinicians can achieve results on par with using sharp needles for dermal filler treatments (Dermatol Surg. 2020 Apr;46[4]:465-72; Dermatol Surg. 2012 Feb;38[2]:207-14). A recent head-to-head comparison found no significant differences in the use of needles vs. cannulas for the treatment of the dorsal hand with diluted calcium hydroxylapatite, though patients reported 12% greater satisfaction with the cannula technique (Dermatol Surg. 2020 Oct;46 Suppl 1:S54-61).

“Based on these articles, we can feel comfortable that with proficient use, you can deliver similar results with the cannula as you would with the needle,” said Dr. Keaney, a clinical associate faculty member in the department of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington. “As a result, we are seeing Food and Drug Administration–approved indications for the use of cannulas for dermal fillers: Restylane Silk for lips, Restylane Lyft for cheeks, Juvederm Voluma for cheeks, and Juvederm Voluma for the chin.”



Such emerging data present a conundrum, though. If someone is comfortable injecting dermal filler with needles, why switch to using cannulas? After all, a case study reported arterial penetration with blunt-tipped cannulas using injectables . “Cannulas are not 100% safe,” Dr. Keaney said. “One of my mentors once said, “If a vascular event has not happened to you yet, you have not injected enough. These things can happen even in the most experienced hands, whether you use a needle or a cannula.”

However, safety data from a recently published retrospective study demonstrated that cannulas are less likely to be associated with occlusions compared with needles (a risk of 1 occlusion per 40,882 injections vs. 1 occlusion per 6,410 injections (P less than .001) (JAMA Dermatol. 2021 Feb 1;157[2]:174-80).

“Cannulas are generally safer because the blunt tip kind of dissects tissue and pushes vessels away,” he said. “That doesn’t mean it can’t get into a vessel, it just requires greater force to penetrate facial arteries with a cannula. Finer tips may be easier to use.”

Larger cannulas can tear into an arterial wall when the artery wall is relatively fixed, so it cannot slide aside enough to avoid injury, Dr. Keaney continued. “Arterial location perpendicular to cannula trajectory carries the most risk,” he said. Meanwhile, filler-induced blindness, which he characterized as “the worst possible outcome,” is often due to the retrograde embolization of the product. This can occur with injection pressures greater than the sum of the systolic arterial pressure and the frictional forces due to viscous flow.

Dr. Keaney said he uses both needles and cannulas in his clinical practice. “I use a needle to inject on bone if I want to mimic bony projections along the zygomatic arch or jawline or chin,” he said. “I think a needle can get those boluses to develop that projection that you want. If I’m injecting within soft tissue plane, I use a 22 G cannula and keep the cannula moving within the tissue. I inject slowly and less than 0.2 cc per bolus. I compress when injecting on the nose and I’m cautious to inject previous patients who have undergone plastic surgery or in areas of previous scarring.”

Dr. Keaney reported that he is a consultant to and/or an advisory board member for several pharmaceutical companies.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

Many dermatologists favor using either needles or cannulas for dermal filler treatments, but there’s a role for both instruments, according to Terrence Keaney, MD.

FlamingoImages/iStock/Getty Images

“You may be a needle person or a cannula person, but it doesn’t have to be that way,” he said during the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference. “There are pros and cons of both techniques, but I think there’s a place for both.”

Dr. Terrence Keaney


With a sharp needle, placement of the tip is considered precise, especially when delivering a supraperiosteal injection. “From a learning curve, especially for us as dermatologists, it’s easier because we’re used to injecting lidocaine, and we’re using needles on a day-to-day basis for injectables and other applications,” said Dr. Keaney, a dermatologist who is founder and director of SkinDC in Arlington, Va. “However, use of a needle is traumatic; it creates an increased risk of bruising and we’re cutting through tissue. We can potentially puncture a blood vessel and create a vascular event.”

Clinicians may consider filler delivery by sharp needle as being more precise, but in an observational cadaver study of cannula vs. sharp needle for placement of tissue fillers, investigators found an increased risk for spread of filler to more superficial layers along the needle trajectory, as well as a higher risk of intra-arterial injection. “This may explain why, when you’re injecting on a tear trough, you may still get some swelling in the area,” Dr. Keaney said. “You may see some swelling and some product, because it’s tracking along the injection point. One can argue that you can reduce this risk by using a longer needle or cannula.”

With a longer cannula, the blunt tips may act to displace blood vessels rather than to lacerate them. “They allow for greater coverage through fewer injection points and they approach the injection site at a more oblique angle, so it’s harder for the product to track,” he explained. “Cannula patients tend to faint on me a lot more than my needle patients do, so while the cannula may be more comfortable, it can be more nerve-wracking for patients.”

Recent studies have shown that with cannula proficiency, clinicians can achieve results on par with using sharp needles for dermal filler treatments (Dermatol Surg. 2020 Apr;46[4]:465-72; Dermatol Surg. 2012 Feb;38[2]:207-14). A recent head-to-head comparison found no significant differences in the use of needles vs. cannulas for the treatment of the dorsal hand with diluted calcium hydroxylapatite, though patients reported 12% greater satisfaction with the cannula technique (Dermatol Surg. 2020 Oct;46 Suppl 1:S54-61).

“Based on these articles, we can feel comfortable that with proficient use, you can deliver similar results with the cannula as you would with the needle,” said Dr. Keaney, a clinical associate faculty member in the department of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington. “As a result, we are seeing Food and Drug Administration–approved indications for the use of cannulas for dermal fillers: Restylane Silk for lips, Restylane Lyft for cheeks, Juvederm Voluma for cheeks, and Juvederm Voluma for the chin.”



Such emerging data present a conundrum, though. If someone is comfortable injecting dermal filler with needles, why switch to using cannulas? After all, a case study reported arterial penetration with blunt-tipped cannulas using injectables . “Cannulas are not 100% safe,” Dr. Keaney said. “One of my mentors once said, “If a vascular event has not happened to you yet, you have not injected enough. These things can happen even in the most experienced hands, whether you use a needle or a cannula.”

However, safety data from a recently published retrospective study demonstrated that cannulas are less likely to be associated with occlusions compared with needles (a risk of 1 occlusion per 40,882 injections vs. 1 occlusion per 6,410 injections (P less than .001) (JAMA Dermatol. 2021 Feb 1;157[2]:174-80).

“Cannulas are generally safer because the blunt tip kind of dissects tissue and pushes vessels away,” he said. “That doesn’t mean it can’t get into a vessel, it just requires greater force to penetrate facial arteries with a cannula. Finer tips may be easier to use.”

Larger cannulas can tear into an arterial wall when the artery wall is relatively fixed, so it cannot slide aside enough to avoid injury, Dr. Keaney continued. “Arterial location perpendicular to cannula trajectory carries the most risk,” he said. Meanwhile, filler-induced blindness, which he characterized as “the worst possible outcome,” is often due to the retrograde embolization of the product. This can occur with injection pressures greater than the sum of the systolic arterial pressure and the frictional forces due to viscous flow.

Dr. Keaney said he uses both needles and cannulas in his clinical practice. “I use a needle to inject on bone if I want to mimic bony projections along the zygomatic arch or jawline or chin,” he said. “I think a needle can get those boluses to develop that projection that you want. If I’m injecting within soft tissue plane, I use a 22 G cannula and keep the cannula moving within the tissue. I inject slowly and less than 0.2 cc per bolus. I compress when injecting on the nose and I’m cautious to inject previous patients who have undergone plastic surgery or in areas of previous scarring.”

Dr. Keaney reported that he is a consultant to and/or an advisory board member for several pharmaceutical companies.

Many dermatologists favor using either needles or cannulas for dermal filler treatments, but there’s a role for both instruments, according to Terrence Keaney, MD.

FlamingoImages/iStock/Getty Images

“You may be a needle person or a cannula person, but it doesn’t have to be that way,” he said during the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference. “There are pros and cons of both techniques, but I think there’s a place for both.”

Dr. Terrence Keaney


With a sharp needle, placement of the tip is considered precise, especially when delivering a supraperiosteal injection. “From a learning curve, especially for us as dermatologists, it’s easier because we’re used to injecting lidocaine, and we’re using needles on a day-to-day basis for injectables and other applications,” said Dr. Keaney, a dermatologist who is founder and director of SkinDC in Arlington, Va. “However, use of a needle is traumatic; it creates an increased risk of bruising and we’re cutting through tissue. We can potentially puncture a blood vessel and create a vascular event.”

Clinicians may consider filler delivery by sharp needle as being more precise, but in an observational cadaver study of cannula vs. sharp needle for placement of tissue fillers, investigators found an increased risk for spread of filler to more superficial layers along the needle trajectory, as well as a higher risk of intra-arterial injection. “This may explain why, when you’re injecting on a tear trough, you may still get some swelling in the area,” Dr. Keaney said. “You may see some swelling and some product, because it’s tracking along the injection point. One can argue that you can reduce this risk by using a longer needle or cannula.”

With a longer cannula, the blunt tips may act to displace blood vessels rather than to lacerate them. “They allow for greater coverage through fewer injection points and they approach the injection site at a more oblique angle, so it’s harder for the product to track,” he explained. “Cannula patients tend to faint on me a lot more than my needle patients do, so while the cannula may be more comfortable, it can be more nerve-wracking for patients.”

Recent studies have shown that with cannula proficiency, clinicians can achieve results on par with using sharp needles for dermal filler treatments (Dermatol Surg. 2020 Apr;46[4]:465-72; Dermatol Surg. 2012 Feb;38[2]:207-14). A recent head-to-head comparison found no significant differences in the use of needles vs. cannulas for the treatment of the dorsal hand with diluted calcium hydroxylapatite, though patients reported 12% greater satisfaction with the cannula technique (Dermatol Surg. 2020 Oct;46 Suppl 1:S54-61).

“Based on these articles, we can feel comfortable that with proficient use, you can deliver similar results with the cannula as you would with the needle,” said Dr. Keaney, a clinical associate faculty member in the department of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington. “As a result, we are seeing Food and Drug Administration–approved indications for the use of cannulas for dermal fillers: Restylane Silk for lips, Restylane Lyft for cheeks, Juvederm Voluma for cheeks, and Juvederm Voluma for the chin.”



Such emerging data present a conundrum, though. If someone is comfortable injecting dermal filler with needles, why switch to using cannulas? After all, a case study reported arterial penetration with blunt-tipped cannulas using injectables . “Cannulas are not 100% safe,” Dr. Keaney said. “One of my mentors once said, “If a vascular event has not happened to you yet, you have not injected enough. These things can happen even in the most experienced hands, whether you use a needle or a cannula.”

However, safety data from a recently published retrospective study demonstrated that cannulas are less likely to be associated with occlusions compared with needles (a risk of 1 occlusion per 40,882 injections vs. 1 occlusion per 6,410 injections (P less than .001) (JAMA Dermatol. 2021 Feb 1;157[2]:174-80).

“Cannulas are generally safer because the blunt tip kind of dissects tissue and pushes vessels away,” he said. “That doesn’t mean it can’t get into a vessel, it just requires greater force to penetrate facial arteries with a cannula. Finer tips may be easier to use.”

Larger cannulas can tear into an arterial wall when the artery wall is relatively fixed, so it cannot slide aside enough to avoid injury, Dr. Keaney continued. “Arterial location perpendicular to cannula trajectory carries the most risk,” he said. Meanwhile, filler-induced blindness, which he characterized as “the worst possible outcome,” is often due to the retrograde embolization of the product. This can occur with injection pressures greater than the sum of the systolic arterial pressure and the frictional forces due to viscous flow.

Dr. Keaney said he uses both needles and cannulas in his clinical practice. “I use a needle to inject on bone if I want to mimic bony projections along the zygomatic arch or jawline or chin,” he said. “I think a needle can get those boluses to develop that projection that you want. If I’m injecting within soft tissue plane, I use a 22 G cannula and keep the cannula moving within the tissue. I inject slowly and less than 0.2 cc per bolus. I compress when injecting on the nose and I’m cautious to inject previous patients who have undergone plastic surgery or in areas of previous scarring.”

Dr. Keaney reported that he is a consultant to and/or an advisory board member for several pharmaceutical companies.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM ODAC 2021

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer

ASDSA warns of rogue insulin pen use for DIY fillers

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 05/03/2022 - 15:06

Videos on social media showing children using insulin delivery pens to self-inject hyaluronic acid has prompted a safety warning from the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association.

In the safety warning, issued on Feb. 18, the ASDSA reported that ASDSA members, all board-certified dermatologists, have seen evidence online of young people using so-called “hyaluron pens” to inject hyaluronic acid filler in the epidermal and upper dermal skin.

The pens being used and promoted in social media for do-it-yourself filler injections are medical devices originally developed for insulin injections. “The use of air pressure technology causes these pens to deliver the hyaluronic acid to insert nanoscale molecules of the filler through the skin,” according to the ASDSA statement. Marketing materials state that the pens can be used to create volume and shape in the lips, and to improve the appearance of nasolabial lines, marionette lines, brow lines known as “elevens,” and forehead wrinkles. Claims that the hyaluronic acid only reaches the papillary layer of the dermis, and is therefore safe, do not alleviate the risk of injury in inexperienced hands, the ASDSA statement points out.

“We are concerned about California children falling prey to products that are not appropriate and safe for them to use,” Elan Newland, MD, member of the ASDSA and the California Society for Dermatology and Dermatological Surgery (CalDerm), said in the statement. “The power of social media is very strong, especially for impressionable teenagers. CalDerm supports alerting consumers and regulators of the dangers of these pens,” he said.  

Dr. Sandra Lee


“TikTok is proving to be an extremely powerful platform to communicate, entertain, and even educate, which is why many physicians are getting involved and finding success there. Unfortunately, just like the World Wide Web, there is misinformation there and even dangerous lies,” Sandra Lee, MD, who practices in Upland, Calif. (and is also known as “Dr. Pimple Popper”), said in the statement.

“It’s very concerning to see young people posting a How To on injecting their own lips with hyaluronic acid serum using an ‘airgun’ pen, which acts much like a BB gun to push with force the product under the skin,” she added. “So many things can go wrong.”

The ASDSA has contacted the Food and Drug Administration to report these safety concerns. “In addition, the ASDSA is alerting state medical and estheticians’ boards regarding these patient safety concerns and alerting consumers directly about the risks through social media and other education materials,” according to the statement.

Publications
Topics
Sections

Videos on social media showing children using insulin delivery pens to self-inject hyaluronic acid has prompted a safety warning from the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association.

In the safety warning, issued on Feb. 18, the ASDSA reported that ASDSA members, all board-certified dermatologists, have seen evidence online of young people using so-called “hyaluron pens” to inject hyaluronic acid filler in the epidermal and upper dermal skin.

The pens being used and promoted in social media for do-it-yourself filler injections are medical devices originally developed for insulin injections. “The use of air pressure technology causes these pens to deliver the hyaluronic acid to insert nanoscale molecules of the filler through the skin,” according to the ASDSA statement. Marketing materials state that the pens can be used to create volume and shape in the lips, and to improve the appearance of nasolabial lines, marionette lines, brow lines known as “elevens,” and forehead wrinkles. Claims that the hyaluronic acid only reaches the papillary layer of the dermis, and is therefore safe, do not alleviate the risk of injury in inexperienced hands, the ASDSA statement points out.

“We are concerned about California children falling prey to products that are not appropriate and safe for them to use,” Elan Newland, MD, member of the ASDSA and the California Society for Dermatology and Dermatological Surgery (CalDerm), said in the statement. “The power of social media is very strong, especially for impressionable teenagers. CalDerm supports alerting consumers and regulators of the dangers of these pens,” he said.  

Dr. Sandra Lee


“TikTok is proving to be an extremely powerful platform to communicate, entertain, and even educate, which is why many physicians are getting involved and finding success there. Unfortunately, just like the World Wide Web, there is misinformation there and even dangerous lies,” Sandra Lee, MD, who practices in Upland, Calif. (and is also known as “Dr. Pimple Popper”), said in the statement.

“It’s very concerning to see young people posting a How To on injecting their own lips with hyaluronic acid serum using an ‘airgun’ pen, which acts much like a BB gun to push with force the product under the skin,” she added. “So many things can go wrong.”

The ASDSA has contacted the Food and Drug Administration to report these safety concerns. “In addition, the ASDSA is alerting state medical and estheticians’ boards regarding these patient safety concerns and alerting consumers directly about the risks through social media and other education materials,” according to the statement.

Videos on social media showing children using insulin delivery pens to self-inject hyaluronic acid has prompted a safety warning from the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association.

In the safety warning, issued on Feb. 18, the ASDSA reported that ASDSA members, all board-certified dermatologists, have seen evidence online of young people using so-called “hyaluron pens” to inject hyaluronic acid filler in the epidermal and upper dermal skin.

The pens being used and promoted in social media for do-it-yourself filler injections are medical devices originally developed for insulin injections. “The use of air pressure technology causes these pens to deliver the hyaluronic acid to insert nanoscale molecules of the filler through the skin,” according to the ASDSA statement. Marketing materials state that the pens can be used to create volume and shape in the lips, and to improve the appearance of nasolabial lines, marionette lines, brow lines known as “elevens,” and forehead wrinkles. Claims that the hyaluronic acid only reaches the papillary layer of the dermis, and is therefore safe, do not alleviate the risk of injury in inexperienced hands, the ASDSA statement points out.

“We are concerned about California children falling prey to products that are not appropriate and safe for them to use,” Elan Newland, MD, member of the ASDSA and the California Society for Dermatology and Dermatological Surgery (CalDerm), said in the statement. “The power of social media is very strong, especially for impressionable teenagers. CalDerm supports alerting consumers and regulators of the dangers of these pens,” he said.  

Dr. Sandra Lee


“TikTok is proving to be an extremely powerful platform to communicate, entertain, and even educate, which is why many physicians are getting involved and finding success there. Unfortunately, just like the World Wide Web, there is misinformation there and even dangerous lies,” Sandra Lee, MD, who practices in Upland, Calif. (and is also known as “Dr. Pimple Popper”), said in the statement.

“It’s very concerning to see young people posting a How To on injecting their own lips with hyaluronic acid serum using an ‘airgun’ pen, which acts much like a BB gun to push with force the product under the skin,” she added. “So many things can go wrong.”

The ASDSA has contacted the Food and Drug Administration to report these safety concerns. “In addition, the ASDSA is alerting state medical and estheticians’ boards regarding these patient safety concerns and alerting consumers directly about the risks through social media and other education materials,” according to the statement.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer

Treatment of horizontal neck lines

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 02/11/2021 - 11:02

The aging neck is a complicated, difficult to treat area often requiring a combination of treatments for noninvasive rejuvenation. The interplay of the neck subunits, as outlined in the recent article by Friedman and colleagues, requires multiple combination treatments, including fat removal, augmentation of deficient bony prominences, relaxation of hyperkinetic muscles, tissue tightening, suture anchoring, skin resurfacing, and treatment of dyschromia.

Courtesy Dr. Talakoub
Horizontal neck lines in a 23-year-old woman

Horizontal neck lines are linear etched lines or furrows that commonly appear at a young age and are not caused by the aging process. The anatomy of the neck and the manner in which it bends contributes to their development at an early age. It is hypothesized that variable adipose tissue thickness and fibromuscular bands contribute to deepening of these lines in overweight patients. The widespread use of cell phones, laptops, and tablets has increased their prevalence and this has become one of the most common concerns of patients aged under 30 years in my clinic.



Various treatments have been recommended for neck rejuvenation, including hyaluronic acid and dilute calcium hydroxylapatite. In my experience, neither of these treatments adequately resolves the horizontal neck lines, and more importantly, prevents them from reoccurring. In addition, given the variability in skin and adipose thickness in the anterior neck, side effects including lumps, irregular correction, and the Tyndall effect, are common, particularly with incorrect choice of filler and injection depth.

Dr. Naissan O. Wesley

The fibromuscular bands along the transverse neck lines pose one of the complexities in treatment with injectable filler. I have had significant improvement in the aesthetic outcome of my patients by using subcision along the transverse bands extensively prior to injection with hyaluronic acid fillers. The subcision is done with a 27-gauge needle to release the fibrous bands that tether the tissue down. If a patient has excess adipose tissue on either side of the bands, injectable fillers often do not improve the appearance of the lines and can make the neck appear heavier. The use of subcision followed by one to six treatments of deoxycholic acid in the adjacent adipose tissue prior to injection with a filler will help even out the contour of the neck, decrease adipose tissue bulges, release the fibrous bands, and fill the lines properly.

Working from home and on handheld devices has increased the appearance of neck lines in young populations. Despite the vast array of treatments in the aging neck, none have been very successful for this particular problem in the young. We need an improved understanding of these lines and better studies to investigate treatment options and long-term correction.

Dr. Lily Talakoub


References:

Friedman O et al. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021 Feb;20(2):569-76.

Brandt FS and Boker A. Dermatol Clin. 2004 Apr;22(2):159-66.

Tseng F and Yu H. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2019 Aug 19;7(8):e2366.

Dibernardo BE. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2013 Apr;15(2):56-64.

Jones D et al. Dermatol Surg. 2016 Oct;4 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S235-42.

Lee SK and Kim HS. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2018 Aug;17(4):590-5.

Chao YY et al. Dermatol Surg. 2011 Oct;37(10):1542-5.

Han TY et al. Dermatol Surg. 2011 Sep;37(9):1291-6.

Dr. Wesley and Dr. Talakoub are cocontributors to this column. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. This month’s column is by Dr. Talakoub. Write to them at [email protected]. They had no relevant disclosures.

Publications
Topics
Sections

The aging neck is a complicated, difficult to treat area often requiring a combination of treatments for noninvasive rejuvenation. The interplay of the neck subunits, as outlined in the recent article by Friedman and colleagues, requires multiple combination treatments, including fat removal, augmentation of deficient bony prominences, relaxation of hyperkinetic muscles, tissue tightening, suture anchoring, skin resurfacing, and treatment of dyschromia.

Courtesy Dr. Talakoub
Horizontal neck lines in a 23-year-old woman

Horizontal neck lines are linear etched lines or furrows that commonly appear at a young age and are not caused by the aging process. The anatomy of the neck and the manner in which it bends contributes to their development at an early age. It is hypothesized that variable adipose tissue thickness and fibromuscular bands contribute to deepening of these lines in overweight patients. The widespread use of cell phones, laptops, and tablets has increased their prevalence and this has become one of the most common concerns of patients aged under 30 years in my clinic.



Various treatments have been recommended for neck rejuvenation, including hyaluronic acid and dilute calcium hydroxylapatite. In my experience, neither of these treatments adequately resolves the horizontal neck lines, and more importantly, prevents them from reoccurring. In addition, given the variability in skin and adipose thickness in the anterior neck, side effects including lumps, irregular correction, and the Tyndall effect, are common, particularly with incorrect choice of filler and injection depth.

Dr. Naissan O. Wesley

The fibromuscular bands along the transverse neck lines pose one of the complexities in treatment with injectable filler. I have had significant improvement in the aesthetic outcome of my patients by using subcision along the transverse bands extensively prior to injection with hyaluronic acid fillers. The subcision is done with a 27-gauge needle to release the fibrous bands that tether the tissue down. If a patient has excess adipose tissue on either side of the bands, injectable fillers often do not improve the appearance of the lines and can make the neck appear heavier. The use of subcision followed by one to six treatments of deoxycholic acid in the adjacent adipose tissue prior to injection with a filler will help even out the contour of the neck, decrease adipose tissue bulges, release the fibrous bands, and fill the lines properly.

Working from home and on handheld devices has increased the appearance of neck lines in young populations. Despite the vast array of treatments in the aging neck, none have been very successful for this particular problem in the young. We need an improved understanding of these lines and better studies to investigate treatment options and long-term correction.

Dr. Lily Talakoub


References:

Friedman O et al. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021 Feb;20(2):569-76.

Brandt FS and Boker A. Dermatol Clin. 2004 Apr;22(2):159-66.

Tseng F and Yu H. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2019 Aug 19;7(8):e2366.

Dibernardo BE. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2013 Apr;15(2):56-64.

Jones D et al. Dermatol Surg. 2016 Oct;4 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S235-42.

Lee SK and Kim HS. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2018 Aug;17(4):590-5.

Chao YY et al. Dermatol Surg. 2011 Oct;37(10):1542-5.

Han TY et al. Dermatol Surg. 2011 Sep;37(9):1291-6.

Dr. Wesley and Dr. Talakoub are cocontributors to this column. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. This month’s column is by Dr. Talakoub. Write to them at [email protected]. They had no relevant disclosures.

The aging neck is a complicated, difficult to treat area often requiring a combination of treatments for noninvasive rejuvenation. The interplay of the neck subunits, as outlined in the recent article by Friedman and colleagues, requires multiple combination treatments, including fat removal, augmentation of deficient bony prominences, relaxation of hyperkinetic muscles, tissue tightening, suture anchoring, skin resurfacing, and treatment of dyschromia.

Courtesy Dr. Talakoub
Horizontal neck lines in a 23-year-old woman

Horizontal neck lines are linear etched lines or furrows that commonly appear at a young age and are not caused by the aging process. The anatomy of the neck and the manner in which it bends contributes to their development at an early age. It is hypothesized that variable adipose tissue thickness and fibromuscular bands contribute to deepening of these lines in overweight patients. The widespread use of cell phones, laptops, and tablets has increased their prevalence and this has become one of the most common concerns of patients aged under 30 years in my clinic.



Various treatments have been recommended for neck rejuvenation, including hyaluronic acid and dilute calcium hydroxylapatite. In my experience, neither of these treatments adequately resolves the horizontal neck lines, and more importantly, prevents them from reoccurring. In addition, given the variability in skin and adipose thickness in the anterior neck, side effects including lumps, irregular correction, and the Tyndall effect, are common, particularly with incorrect choice of filler and injection depth.

Dr. Naissan O. Wesley

The fibromuscular bands along the transverse neck lines pose one of the complexities in treatment with injectable filler. I have had significant improvement in the aesthetic outcome of my patients by using subcision along the transverse bands extensively prior to injection with hyaluronic acid fillers. The subcision is done with a 27-gauge needle to release the fibrous bands that tether the tissue down. If a patient has excess adipose tissue on either side of the bands, injectable fillers often do not improve the appearance of the lines and can make the neck appear heavier. The use of subcision followed by one to six treatments of deoxycholic acid in the adjacent adipose tissue prior to injection with a filler will help even out the contour of the neck, decrease adipose tissue bulges, release the fibrous bands, and fill the lines properly.

Working from home and on handheld devices has increased the appearance of neck lines in young populations. Despite the vast array of treatments in the aging neck, none have been very successful for this particular problem in the young. We need an improved understanding of these lines and better studies to investigate treatment options and long-term correction.

Dr. Lily Talakoub


References:

Friedman O et al. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021 Feb;20(2):569-76.

Brandt FS and Boker A. Dermatol Clin. 2004 Apr;22(2):159-66.

Tseng F and Yu H. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2019 Aug 19;7(8):e2366.

Dibernardo BE. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2013 Apr;15(2):56-64.

Jones D et al. Dermatol Surg. 2016 Oct;4 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S235-42.

Lee SK and Kim HS. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2018 Aug;17(4):590-5.

Chao YY et al. Dermatol Surg. 2011 Oct;37(10):1542-5.

Han TY et al. Dermatol Surg. 2011 Sep;37(9):1291-6.

Dr. Wesley and Dr. Talakoub are cocontributors to this column. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. This month’s column is by Dr. Talakoub. Write to them at [email protected]. They had no relevant disclosures.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer

The cutaneous benefits of bee venom, Part I: Atopic dermatitis and acne

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 02/10/2021 - 17:06

Honeybees, Apis mellifera, play an important role in the web of life. We rely on bees for pollinating approximately one-third of our crops, including multiple fruits, vegetables, nuts, and seeds.1,2 Bees are also instrumental in the propagation of other plants, flower nectar, and flower pollen. A. mellifera, the European honeybee, is the main pollinator in Europe and North America, but other species, including A. cerana, A. dorsata, A. floria, A. andreniformis, A. koschevnikov, and A. laboriosa, yield honey.3 Honey, propolis, and royal jelly, along with beeswax and bee pollen, are among some of the celebrated bee products that have been found to confer health benefits to human beings.4,5 Bee venom, a toxin bees use for protection, is a convoluted combination of peptides and toxic proteins such as phospholipase A2 (PLA2) and melittin that has garnered significant scientific attention of late and is used to treat various inflammatory conditions.6-8 This column will focus on the investigation of the use of bee venom to treat atopic dermatitis (AD) and acne.

temmuzcan/Getty Images

Atopic dermatitis

In 2013, Kim et al. assessed the impact of bee venom on AD-related symptoms in mice, finding that it attenuated the effects of AD-simulating compounds in 48 of 80 patients injected subcutaneously. They concluded that bee venom acted by suppressing mast cell degranulation and proinflammatory cytokine expression.Three years later, You et al. conducted a double-blind, randomized, base-controlled multicenter study of 136 patients with AD to ascertain the effects of a bee venom emollient. For 4 weeks, patients applied an emollient with bee venom and silk protein or a vehicle lacking bee venom twice daily. Eczema area and severity index (EASI) scores were significantly lower in the bee venom group, as were the visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. The investigators concluded that bee venom is an effective and safe therapeutic choice for treating patients with AD.10 Further, in 2018, Shin et al. demonstrated that PLA2 derived from bee venom mitigates atopic skin inflammation via the CD206 mannose receptor. They had previously shown in a mouse model that PLA2 from bee venom exerts such activity against AD-like lesions induced by 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB) and house dust mite (Dermatophagoides farinae) extract.11 Gu et al. observed later that year that intraperitoneal administration of bee venom eased the symptoms of ovalbumin-induced AD-like skin lesions in an experimental mouse model. Bee venom also lowered serum immunoglobulin E levels and suppressed infiltration of eosinophils and mast cells. They concluded that bee venom is a viable alternative for attenuating the allergic skin inflammation characteristic of AD.12 At the end of 2018, An et al. reported on the use of an in vivo female Balb/c mouse AD model in which 1-chloro-DNCB acted as inducer in cultures of human keratinocytes, stimulated by TNF-alpha/IFN-gamma. The investigators found that bee venom and melittin displayed robust antiatopic effects as evidenced by reduced lesions. The bee products were also found to have hindered elevated expression of various chemokines and proinflammatory cytokines. The authors suggested that bee venom and melittin appear to warrant consideration as a topical treatment for AD.13 In 2019, Kim et al. demonstrated in mice that bee venom eases the symptoms of AD by inactivating the complement system, particularly through CD55 induction, which might account for its effectiveness in AD treatment in humans, they suggested.Early in 2020, Lee et al. demonstrated in a Balb/c mouse model that bee venom appears to be a possible therapeutic macromolecule for treating phthalic anhydride-induced AD.7
 

 

 

Acne

In 2013, in vitro experiments by Han et al. showed that purified bee venom exhibited antimicrobial activity, in a concentration-dependent manner, against Cutibacterium acnes (or Propionibacterium acnes). They followed up with a small randomized, double-blind, controlled trial with 12 subjects who were treated with cosmetics with pure bee venom or cosmetics without it for two weeks. The group receiving bee venom experienced significantly fewer inflammatory and noninflammatory lesions, and a significant decline in adenosine triphosphate levels (a 57.5% reduction) was noted in subjects in the bee venom group, with a nonsignificant decrease of 4.7% observed in the control group. The investigators concluded the purified bee venom may be suitable as an antiacne agent.14 Using a mouse model, An et al. studied the therapeutic effects of bee venom against C. acnes–induced skin inflammation. They found that bee venom significantly diminished the volume of infiltrated inflammatory cells in the treated mice, compared with untreated mice. Bee venom also decreased expression levels of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, and interleukin (IL)-1beta and suppressed Toll-like receptor (TLR)2 and CD14 expression in C. acnes–injected tissue. The investigators concluded that bee venom imparts notable anti-inflammatory activity and has potential for use in treating acne and as an anti-inflammatory agent in skin care.15

Dr. Leslie S. Baumann

In 2015, Kim et al. studied the influence of bee venom against C. acnes–induced inflammation in human keratinocytes (HaCaT) and monocytes (THP-1). They found that bee venom successfully suppressed the secretion of interferon-gamma, IL-1beta, IL-8, and TNF-alpha. It also galvanized the expression of IL-8 and TLR2 in HaCaT cells but hampered their expression in heat-killed C. acnes. The researchers concluded that bee venom displays considerable anti-inflammatory activity against C. acnes and warrants consideration as an alternative to antibiotic acne treatment.16 It is worth noting that early that year, in a comprehensive database review to evaluate the effects and safety of a wide range of complementary treatments for acne, Cao et al. found, among 35 studies including parallel-group randomized controlled trials, that one trial indicated bee venom was superior to control in lowering the number of acne lesions.17
 

Conclusion

More research, in the form of randomized, controlled trials, is required before bee venom can be incorporated into the dermatologic armamentarium as a first-line therapy for common and vexing cutaneous conditions. Nevertheless, the current evidence provides reasons for optimism that bee venom can play a role among the various treatments for AD and acne.
 

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author, and entrepreneur who practices in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann has written two textbooks and a New York Times Best Sellers book for consumers. Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Galderma, Revance, Evolus, and Burt’s Bees. She is the CEO of Skin Type Solutions Inc., a company that independently tests skin care products and makes recommendations to physicians on which skin care technologies are best. Write to her at [email protected].

References

1. Walsh B. The plight of the honeybee: Mass deaths in bee colonies may mean disaster for farmers – and your favorite Foods. Time Magazine, 2013 Aug 19.

2. Klein AM et al. Proc Biol Sci. 2007 Feb 7;274(1608):303-13. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2006.3721.

3. Ediriweera ER and Premarathna NY. AYU. 2012 Apr;33(2):178-82. doi: 10.4103/0974-8520.105233.

4. Baumann, L. Honey/Propolis/Royal Jelly. In Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients. New York:McGraw-Hill; 2014:203-212.

5. Cornara L et al. Front Pharmacol. 2017 Jun 28;8:412. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2017.00412.

6. Kim Y et al. Toxins (Basel). 2019 Apr 26;11(5):239. doi: 10.3390/toxins11050239.

7. Lee YJ et al. Inflammopharmacology. 2020 Feb;28(1):253-63. doi: 10.1007/s10787-019-00646-w.

8. Lee G and Bae H. Molecules. 2016 May 11;21(5):616. doi: 10.3390/molecules21050616.

9. Kim KH et al. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2013 Nov 15;6(12):2896-903.

10. You CE et al. Ann Dermatol. 2016 Oct;28(5):593-9. doi: 10.5021/ad.2016.28.5.593.

11. Shin D et al. Toxins (Basel). 2018 Apr 2;10(4):146. doi: 10.3390/toxins10040146.

12. Gu H et al. Mol Med Rep. 2018 Oct;18(4):3711-8. doi: 10.3892/mmr.2018.9398.

13. An HJ et al. Br J Pharmacol. 2018 Dec;175(23):4310-24. doi: 10.1111/bph.14487.

14. Han SM et al. J Integr Med. 2013 Sep;11(5):320-6. doi: 10.3736/jintegrmed2013043.

15. An HJ et al. Int J Mol Med. 2014 Nov;34(5):1341-8. doi: 10.3892/ijmm.2014.1933.

16. Kim JY et al. Int J Mol Med. 2015 Jun;35(6):1651-6. doi: 10.3892/ijmm.2015.2180.

17. Cao H et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 19;1:CD009436. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009436.pub2.

Publications
Topics
Sections

Honeybees, Apis mellifera, play an important role in the web of life. We rely on bees for pollinating approximately one-third of our crops, including multiple fruits, vegetables, nuts, and seeds.1,2 Bees are also instrumental in the propagation of other plants, flower nectar, and flower pollen. A. mellifera, the European honeybee, is the main pollinator in Europe and North America, but other species, including A. cerana, A. dorsata, A. floria, A. andreniformis, A. koschevnikov, and A. laboriosa, yield honey.3 Honey, propolis, and royal jelly, along with beeswax and bee pollen, are among some of the celebrated bee products that have been found to confer health benefits to human beings.4,5 Bee venom, a toxin bees use for protection, is a convoluted combination of peptides and toxic proteins such as phospholipase A2 (PLA2) and melittin that has garnered significant scientific attention of late and is used to treat various inflammatory conditions.6-8 This column will focus on the investigation of the use of bee venom to treat atopic dermatitis (AD) and acne.

temmuzcan/Getty Images

Atopic dermatitis

In 2013, Kim et al. assessed the impact of bee venom on AD-related symptoms in mice, finding that it attenuated the effects of AD-simulating compounds in 48 of 80 patients injected subcutaneously. They concluded that bee venom acted by suppressing mast cell degranulation and proinflammatory cytokine expression.Three years later, You et al. conducted a double-blind, randomized, base-controlled multicenter study of 136 patients with AD to ascertain the effects of a bee venom emollient. For 4 weeks, patients applied an emollient with bee venom and silk protein or a vehicle lacking bee venom twice daily. Eczema area and severity index (EASI) scores were significantly lower in the bee venom group, as were the visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. The investigators concluded that bee venom is an effective and safe therapeutic choice for treating patients with AD.10 Further, in 2018, Shin et al. demonstrated that PLA2 derived from bee venom mitigates atopic skin inflammation via the CD206 mannose receptor. They had previously shown in a mouse model that PLA2 from bee venom exerts such activity against AD-like lesions induced by 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB) and house dust mite (Dermatophagoides farinae) extract.11 Gu et al. observed later that year that intraperitoneal administration of bee venom eased the symptoms of ovalbumin-induced AD-like skin lesions in an experimental mouse model. Bee venom also lowered serum immunoglobulin E levels and suppressed infiltration of eosinophils and mast cells. They concluded that bee venom is a viable alternative for attenuating the allergic skin inflammation characteristic of AD.12 At the end of 2018, An et al. reported on the use of an in vivo female Balb/c mouse AD model in which 1-chloro-DNCB acted as inducer in cultures of human keratinocytes, stimulated by TNF-alpha/IFN-gamma. The investigators found that bee venom and melittin displayed robust antiatopic effects as evidenced by reduced lesions. The bee products were also found to have hindered elevated expression of various chemokines and proinflammatory cytokines. The authors suggested that bee venom and melittin appear to warrant consideration as a topical treatment for AD.13 In 2019, Kim et al. demonstrated in mice that bee venom eases the symptoms of AD by inactivating the complement system, particularly through CD55 induction, which might account for its effectiveness in AD treatment in humans, they suggested.Early in 2020, Lee et al. demonstrated in a Balb/c mouse model that bee venom appears to be a possible therapeutic macromolecule for treating phthalic anhydride-induced AD.7
 

 

 

Acne

In 2013, in vitro experiments by Han et al. showed that purified bee venom exhibited antimicrobial activity, in a concentration-dependent manner, against Cutibacterium acnes (or Propionibacterium acnes). They followed up with a small randomized, double-blind, controlled trial with 12 subjects who were treated with cosmetics with pure bee venom or cosmetics without it for two weeks. The group receiving bee venom experienced significantly fewer inflammatory and noninflammatory lesions, and a significant decline in adenosine triphosphate levels (a 57.5% reduction) was noted in subjects in the bee venom group, with a nonsignificant decrease of 4.7% observed in the control group. The investigators concluded the purified bee venom may be suitable as an antiacne agent.14 Using a mouse model, An et al. studied the therapeutic effects of bee venom against C. acnes–induced skin inflammation. They found that bee venom significantly diminished the volume of infiltrated inflammatory cells in the treated mice, compared with untreated mice. Bee venom also decreased expression levels of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, and interleukin (IL)-1beta and suppressed Toll-like receptor (TLR)2 and CD14 expression in C. acnes–injected tissue. The investigators concluded that bee venom imparts notable anti-inflammatory activity and has potential for use in treating acne and as an anti-inflammatory agent in skin care.15

Dr. Leslie S. Baumann

In 2015, Kim et al. studied the influence of bee venom against C. acnes–induced inflammation in human keratinocytes (HaCaT) and monocytes (THP-1). They found that bee venom successfully suppressed the secretion of interferon-gamma, IL-1beta, IL-8, and TNF-alpha. It also galvanized the expression of IL-8 and TLR2 in HaCaT cells but hampered their expression in heat-killed C. acnes. The researchers concluded that bee venom displays considerable anti-inflammatory activity against C. acnes and warrants consideration as an alternative to antibiotic acne treatment.16 It is worth noting that early that year, in a comprehensive database review to evaluate the effects and safety of a wide range of complementary treatments for acne, Cao et al. found, among 35 studies including parallel-group randomized controlled trials, that one trial indicated bee venom was superior to control in lowering the number of acne lesions.17
 

Conclusion

More research, in the form of randomized, controlled trials, is required before bee venom can be incorporated into the dermatologic armamentarium as a first-line therapy for common and vexing cutaneous conditions. Nevertheless, the current evidence provides reasons for optimism that bee venom can play a role among the various treatments for AD and acne.
 

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author, and entrepreneur who practices in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann has written two textbooks and a New York Times Best Sellers book for consumers. Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Galderma, Revance, Evolus, and Burt’s Bees. She is the CEO of Skin Type Solutions Inc., a company that independently tests skin care products and makes recommendations to physicians on which skin care technologies are best. Write to her at [email protected].

References

1. Walsh B. The plight of the honeybee: Mass deaths in bee colonies may mean disaster for farmers – and your favorite Foods. Time Magazine, 2013 Aug 19.

2. Klein AM et al. Proc Biol Sci. 2007 Feb 7;274(1608):303-13. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2006.3721.

3. Ediriweera ER and Premarathna NY. AYU. 2012 Apr;33(2):178-82. doi: 10.4103/0974-8520.105233.

4. Baumann, L. Honey/Propolis/Royal Jelly. In Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients. New York:McGraw-Hill; 2014:203-212.

5. Cornara L et al. Front Pharmacol. 2017 Jun 28;8:412. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2017.00412.

6. Kim Y et al. Toxins (Basel). 2019 Apr 26;11(5):239. doi: 10.3390/toxins11050239.

7. Lee YJ et al. Inflammopharmacology. 2020 Feb;28(1):253-63. doi: 10.1007/s10787-019-00646-w.

8. Lee G and Bae H. Molecules. 2016 May 11;21(5):616. doi: 10.3390/molecules21050616.

9. Kim KH et al. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2013 Nov 15;6(12):2896-903.

10. You CE et al. Ann Dermatol. 2016 Oct;28(5):593-9. doi: 10.5021/ad.2016.28.5.593.

11. Shin D et al. Toxins (Basel). 2018 Apr 2;10(4):146. doi: 10.3390/toxins10040146.

12. Gu H et al. Mol Med Rep. 2018 Oct;18(4):3711-8. doi: 10.3892/mmr.2018.9398.

13. An HJ et al. Br J Pharmacol. 2018 Dec;175(23):4310-24. doi: 10.1111/bph.14487.

14. Han SM et al. J Integr Med. 2013 Sep;11(5):320-6. doi: 10.3736/jintegrmed2013043.

15. An HJ et al. Int J Mol Med. 2014 Nov;34(5):1341-8. doi: 10.3892/ijmm.2014.1933.

16. Kim JY et al. Int J Mol Med. 2015 Jun;35(6):1651-6. doi: 10.3892/ijmm.2015.2180.

17. Cao H et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 19;1:CD009436. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009436.pub2.

Honeybees, Apis mellifera, play an important role in the web of life. We rely on bees for pollinating approximately one-third of our crops, including multiple fruits, vegetables, nuts, and seeds.1,2 Bees are also instrumental in the propagation of other plants, flower nectar, and flower pollen. A. mellifera, the European honeybee, is the main pollinator in Europe and North America, but other species, including A. cerana, A. dorsata, A. floria, A. andreniformis, A. koschevnikov, and A. laboriosa, yield honey.3 Honey, propolis, and royal jelly, along with beeswax and bee pollen, are among some of the celebrated bee products that have been found to confer health benefits to human beings.4,5 Bee venom, a toxin bees use for protection, is a convoluted combination of peptides and toxic proteins such as phospholipase A2 (PLA2) and melittin that has garnered significant scientific attention of late and is used to treat various inflammatory conditions.6-8 This column will focus on the investigation of the use of bee venom to treat atopic dermatitis (AD) and acne.

temmuzcan/Getty Images

Atopic dermatitis

In 2013, Kim et al. assessed the impact of bee venom on AD-related symptoms in mice, finding that it attenuated the effects of AD-simulating compounds in 48 of 80 patients injected subcutaneously. They concluded that bee venom acted by suppressing mast cell degranulation and proinflammatory cytokine expression.Three years later, You et al. conducted a double-blind, randomized, base-controlled multicenter study of 136 patients with AD to ascertain the effects of a bee venom emollient. For 4 weeks, patients applied an emollient with bee venom and silk protein or a vehicle lacking bee venom twice daily. Eczema area and severity index (EASI) scores were significantly lower in the bee venom group, as were the visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. The investigators concluded that bee venom is an effective and safe therapeutic choice for treating patients with AD.10 Further, in 2018, Shin et al. demonstrated that PLA2 derived from bee venom mitigates atopic skin inflammation via the CD206 mannose receptor. They had previously shown in a mouse model that PLA2 from bee venom exerts such activity against AD-like lesions induced by 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB) and house dust mite (Dermatophagoides farinae) extract.11 Gu et al. observed later that year that intraperitoneal administration of bee venom eased the symptoms of ovalbumin-induced AD-like skin lesions in an experimental mouse model. Bee venom also lowered serum immunoglobulin E levels and suppressed infiltration of eosinophils and mast cells. They concluded that bee venom is a viable alternative for attenuating the allergic skin inflammation characteristic of AD.12 At the end of 2018, An et al. reported on the use of an in vivo female Balb/c mouse AD model in which 1-chloro-DNCB acted as inducer in cultures of human keratinocytes, stimulated by TNF-alpha/IFN-gamma. The investigators found that bee venom and melittin displayed robust antiatopic effects as evidenced by reduced lesions. The bee products were also found to have hindered elevated expression of various chemokines and proinflammatory cytokines. The authors suggested that bee venom and melittin appear to warrant consideration as a topical treatment for AD.13 In 2019, Kim et al. demonstrated in mice that bee venom eases the symptoms of AD by inactivating the complement system, particularly through CD55 induction, which might account for its effectiveness in AD treatment in humans, they suggested.Early in 2020, Lee et al. demonstrated in a Balb/c mouse model that bee venom appears to be a possible therapeutic macromolecule for treating phthalic anhydride-induced AD.7
 

 

 

Acne

In 2013, in vitro experiments by Han et al. showed that purified bee venom exhibited antimicrobial activity, in a concentration-dependent manner, against Cutibacterium acnes (or Propionibacterium acnes). They followed up with a small randomized, double-blind, controlled trial with 12 subjects who were treated with cosmetics with pure bee venom or cosmetics without it for two weeks. The group receiving bee venom experienced significantly fewer inflammatory and noninflammatory lesions, and a significant decline in adenosine triphosphate levels (a 57.5% reduction) was noted in subjects in the bee venom group, with a nonsignificant decrease of 4.7% observed in the control group. The investigators concluded the purified bee venom may be suitable as an antiacne agent.14 Using a mouse model, An et al. studied the therapeutic effects of bee venom against C. acnes–induced skin inflammation. They found that bee venom significantly diminished the volume of infiltrated inflammatory cells in the treated mice, compared with untreated mice. Bee venom also decreased expression levels of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, and interleukin (IL)-1beta and suppressed Toll-like receptor (TLR)2 and CD14 expression in C. acnes–injected tissue. The investigators concluded that bee venom imparts notable anti-inflammatory activity and has potential for use in treating acne and as an anti-inflammatory agent in skin care.15

Dr. Leslie S. Baumann

In 2015, Kim et al. studied the influence of bee venom against C. acnes–induced inflammation in human keratinocytes (HaCaT) and monocytes (THP-1). They found that bee venom successfully suppressed the secretion of interferon-gamma, IL-1beta, IL-8, and TNF-alpha. It also galvanized the expression of IL-8 and TLR2 in HaCaT cells but hampered their expression in heat-killed C. acnes. The researchers concluded that bee venom displays considerable anti-inflammatory activity against C. acnes and warrants consideration as an alternative to antibiotic acne treatment.16 It is worth noting that early that year, in a comprehensive database review to evaluate the effects and safety of a wide range of complementary treatments for acne, Cao et al. found, among 35 studies including parallel-group randomized controlled trials, that one trial indicated bee venom was superior to control in lowering the number of acne lesions.17
 

Conclusion

More research, in the form of randomized, controlled trials, is required before bee venom can be incorporated into the dermatologic armamentarium as a first-line therapy for common and vexing cutaneous conditions. Nevertheless, the current evidence provides reasons for optimism that bee venom can play a role among the various treatments for AD and acne.
 

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author, and entrepreneur who practices in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann has written two textbooks and a New York Times Best Sellers book for consumers. Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Galderma, Revance, Evolus, and Burt’s Bees. She is the CEO of Skin Type Solutions Inc., a company that independently tests skin care products and makes recommendations to physicians on which skin care technologies are best. Write to her at [email protected].

References

1. Walsh B. The plight of the honeybee: Mass deaths in bee colonies may mean disaster for farmers – and your favorite Foods. Time Magazine, 2013 Aug 19.

2. Klein AM et al. Proc Biol Sci. 2007 Feb 7;274(1608):303-13. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2006.3721.

3. Ediriweera ER and Premarathna NY. AYU. 2012 Apr;33(2):178-82. doi: 10.4103/0974-8520.105233.

4. Baumann, L. Honey/Propolis/Royal Jelly. In Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients. New York:McGraw-Hill; 2014:203-212.

5. Cornara L et al. Front Pharmacol. 2017 Jun 28;8:412. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2017.00412.

6. Kim Y et al. Toxins (Basel). 2019 Apr 26;11(5):239. doi: 10.3390/toxins11050239.

7. Lee YJ et al. Inflammopharmacology. 2020 Feb;28(1):253-63. doi: 10.1007/s10787-019-00646-w.

8. Lee G and Bae H. Molecules. 2016 May 11;21(5):616. doi: 10.3390/molecules21050616.

9. Kim KH et al. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2013 Nov 15;6(12):2896-903.

10. You CE et al. Ann Dermatol. 2016 Oct;28(5):593-9. doi: 10.5021/ad.2016.28.5.593.

11. Shin D et al. Toxins (Basel). 2018 Apr 2;10(4):146. doi: 10.3390/toxins10040146.

12. Gu H et al. Mol Med Rep. 2018 Oct;18(4):3711-8. doi: 10.3892/mmr.2018.9398.

13. An HJ et al. Br J Pharmacol. 2018 Dec;175(23):4310-24. doi: 10.1111/bph.14487.

14. Han SM et al. J Integr Med. 2013 Sep;11(5):320-6. doi: 10.3736/jintegrmed2013043.

15. An HJ et al. Int J Mol Med. 2014 Nov;34(5):1341-8. doi: 10.3892/ijmm.2014.1933.

16. Kim JY et al. Int J Mol Med. 2015 Jun;35(6):1651-6. doi: 10.3892/ijmm.2015.2180.

17. Cao H et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 19;1:CD009436. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009436.pub2.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article

How to choose the best aesthetic devices when launching your career

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 02/03/2021 - 14:11

When a new body contouring device hit the market a few years ago, Nazanin Saedi, MD, had an opportunity to become the first Philadelphia area dermatologist to add the technology to her practice.

Dr. Nazanin Saedi

“I thought about it, but it didn’t make sense because it wasn’t something important to my patient population,” Dr. Saedi, who directs the Jefferson Laser Surgery and Cosmetic Dermatology Center in Philadelphia, said during the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference. “If I’m not going to have the patient demand and make money from it, then it just doesn’t make sense.”

That experience illustrates one of many pearls of advice that Dr. Saedi shared during a presentation about how to select the best devices when starting your dermatology career: Know your patient population. “Include additional questions in new patient intake forms or online forms to get a sense of what your patient population is interested in,” she advised. “It’s important to understand that before you start to offer new services. Don’t just depend on social media to inform you of the latest trends and what people are doing across the country, because if you purchase something that is very popular on social media for people in New York or L.A., that might not be the best for your practice.”

According to market trends from the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery, 3.5 million laser-, light-, and energy-based procedures were performed in 2018. The top five were for wrinkles (809,166), sun damage (786,856), facial redness (612,367), excess hair (385,466), and melasma (226,007). “Considering this data, when you start a practice, do you buy something for wrinkles or for sun damage right away?” Dr. Saedi asked. “Maybe, but you really need to gauge the market that you practice in. You also want to consider your own skill set and what other dermatologists in your area are offering. If you don’t want to do aggressive procedures, then purchasing a fractional CO2 laser might not be the best device to start off with. If you are not comfortable dealing with those patients, and potential infections and scarring, then that’s not the right treatment for you. You have to reflect on and identify what you’re comfortable learning and doing and managing.”

Taking time to investigate the services offered by dermatologists and med spas within a few miles of your practice can help you avoid redundancy. “Learn the techniques and the small nuances that will give you a little bit of finesse and make you an expert, to set you apart from other practices,” said Dr. Saedi, who coauthored a chapter in the book, “The Business of Dermatology” (New York: Thieme Medical Publishers, 2020). “I always recommend treating your staff and members of your family, to understand how you can tweak treatments to get the most out of them. Once you treat your staff, they are walking advertisements for what you do. They can also counsel patients, walking them through the healing process after a procedure, so they can know what to expect.”

Appropriate planning and preparation can help avoid acquiring the wrong device, she continued. This includes patient demand, scheduling availability, office space, overhead costs, and the level of staff training. She recommends buying one device at a time and clearing profitability from that device before purchasing another, “because it can be a burden on your practice to have multiple devices all at once,” she said. “You also have to think about the hidden costs – the maintenance and the service contracts. That can exceed $10,000 per year, so consider that when you’re looking to purchase a new device.”



Most people buy laser-, light-, and energy-based devices, but renting for a stretch can help you test the waters without a significant long-term investment. “It might not be the newest laser, but it can help you gauge how much of demand you have for that service to see if you have the patient base to make that larger step of purchasing the device,” she said. “If you buy a new device, make sure that it’s not a counterfeit and that you still have a company service contract. There are many third-party companies selling pre-owned laser aesthetics. Make sure you’re getting the authentic device and that there is some kind of a service contract with the actual manufacturer so they can help fix it when things break down.”

When Dr. Saedi counsels residents about purchasing devices, she typically recommends these five categories in order of preference: vascular, pigment, hair, resurfacing, and body contouring/skin tightening. “If you can cover vascular, pigment, and some kind of textural improvement, you can treat about 90% of aesthetic patients who come through your door,” she said. “Sure, there are some who may want skin tightening that you may not be able to offer with laser resurfacing, but you’re going to be able capture a high patient population by offering these services,” she added. That is why a lot of people end up getting a platform with attachable handpieces, “where you can have one system that is able to offer many different services right off the bat.”

She advised factoring in the amount of time it takes for a procedure and how much time it will take up in a certain room. “That will affect your revenue as well. Are you going to delegate this, or is this something you will do on your own? Take that into account.”

Above all, don’t rush your device purchase. “Some laser company sales representatives may pressure you at the end of a quarter by saying, ‘This is the best deal I’m going to offer you. You’re never going to get a deal like this ever again,’ ” she said. “I advise people to do multiple demos so you’re not just doing a demo for a day and seeing one or two patients. Treat the same patients again a month later. Do multiple demos so that you can feel comfortable. Talk to dermatologists who have the device, who have real experience with it, so you can have the most amount of information moving forward.”

Dr. Saedi reported that she has received equipment from Alma, Aerolase, Cartessa, and Cynosure. She is a consultant to and/or an advisory board member for those companies, as well as for Alastin.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

When a new body contouring device hit the market a few years ago, Nazanin Saedi, MD, had an opportunity to become the first Philadelphia area dermatologist to add the technology to her practice.

Dr. Nazanin Saedi

“I thought about it, but it didn’t make sense because it wasn’t something important to my patient population,” Dr. Saedi, who directs the Jefferson Laser Surgery and Cosmetic Dermatology Center in Philadelphia, said during the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference. “If I’m not going to have the patient demand and make money from it, then it just doesn’t make sense.”

That experience illustrates one of many pearls of advice that Dr. Saedi shared during a presentation about how to select the best devices when starting your dermatology career: Know your patient population. “Include additional questions in new patient intake forms or online forms to get a sense of what your patient population is interested in,” she advised. “It’s important to understand that before you start to offer new services. Don’t just depend on social media to inform you of the latest trends and what people are doing across the country, because if you purchase something that is very popular on social media for people in New York or L.A., that might not be the best for your practice.”

According to market trends from the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery, 3.5 million laser-, light-, and energy-based procedures were performed in 2018. The top five were for wrinkles (809,166), sun damage (786,856), facial redness (612,367), excess hair (385,466), and melasma (226,007). “Considering this data, when you start a practice, do you buy something for wrinkles or for sun damage right away?” Dr. Saedi asked. “Maybe, but you really need to gauge the market that you practice in. You also want to consider your own skill set and what other dermatologists in your area are offering. If you don’t want to do aggressive procedures, then purchasing a fractional CO2 laser might not be the best device to start off with. If you are not comfortable dealing with those patients, and potential infections and scarring, then that’s not the right treatment for you. You have to reflect on and identify what you’re comfortable learning and doing and managing.”

Taking time to investigate the services offered by dermatologists and med spas within a few miles of your practice can help you avoid redundancy. “Learn the techniques and the small nuances that will give you a little bit of finesse and make you an expert, to set you apart from other practices,” said Dr. Saedi, who coauthored a chapter in the book, “The Business of Dermatology” (New York: Thieme Medical Publishers, 2020). “I always recommend treating your staff and members of your family, to understand how you can tweak treatments to get the most out of them. Once you treat your staff, they are walking advertisements for what you do. They can also counsel patients, walking them through the healing process after a procedure, so they can know what to expect.”

Appropriate planning and preparation can help avoid acquiring the wrong device, she continued. This includes patient demand, scheduling availability, office space, overhead costs, and the level of staff training. She recommends buying one device at a time and clearing profitability from that device before purchasing another, “because it can be a burden on your practice to have multiple devices all at once,” she said. “You also have to think about the hidden costs – the maintenance and the service contracts. That can exceed $10,000 per year, so consider that when you’re looking to purchase a new device.”



Most people buy laser-, light-, and energy-based devices, but renting for a stretch can help you test the waters without a significant long-term investment. “It might not be the newest laser, but it can help you gauge how much of demand you have for that service to see if you have the patient base to make that larger step of purchasing the device,” she said. “If you buy a new device, make sure that it’s not a counterfeit and that you still have a company service contract. There are many third-party companies selling pre-owned laser aesthetics. Make sure you’re getting the authentic device and that there is some kind of a service contract with the actual manufacturer so they can help fix it when things break down.”

When Dr. Saedi counsels residents about purchasing devices, she typically recommends these five categories in order of preference: vascular, pigment, hair, resurfacing, and body contouring/skin tightening. “If you can cover vascular, pigment, and some kind of textural improvement, you can treat about 90% of aesthetic patients who come through your door,” she said. “Sure, there are some who may want skin tightening that you may not be able to offer with laser resurfacing, but you’re going to be able capture a high patient population by offering these services,” she added. That is why a lot of people end up getting a platform with attachable handpieces, “where you can have one system that is able to offer many different services right off the bat.”

She advised factoring in the amount of time it takes for a procedure and how much time it will take up in a certain room. “That will affect your revenue as well. Are you going to delegate this, or is this something you will do on your own? Take that into account.”

Above all, don’t rush your device purchase. “Some laser company sales representatives may pressure you at the end of a quarter by saying, ‘This is the best deal I’m going to offer you. You’re never going to get a deal like this ever again,’ ” she said. “I advise people to do multiple demos so you’re not just doing a demo for a day and seeing one or two patients. Treat the same patients again a month later. Do multiple demos so that you can feel comfortable. Talk to dermatologists who have the device, who have real experience with it, so you can have the most amount of information moving forward.”

Dr. Saedi reported that she has received equipment from Alma, Aerolase, Cartessa, and Cynosure. She is a consultant to and/or an advisory board member for those companies, as well as for Alastin.

When a new body contouring device hit the market a few years ago, Nazanin Saedi, MD, had an opportunity to become the first Philadelphia area dermatologist to add the technology to her practice.

Dr. Nazanin Saedi

“I thought about it, but it didn’t make sense because it wasn’t something important to my patient population,” Dr. Saedi, who directs the Jefferson Laser Surgery and Cosmetic Dermatology Center in Philadelphia, said during the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference. “If I’m not going to have the patient demand and make money from it, then it just doesn’t make sense.”

That experience illustrates one of many pearls of advice that Dr. Saedi shared during a presentation about how to select the best devices when starting your dermatology career: Know your patient population. “Include additional questions in new patient intake forms or online forms to get a sense of what your patient population is interested in,” she advised. “It’s important to understand that before you start to offer new services. Don’t just depend on social media to inform you of the latest trends and what people are doing across the country, because if you purchase something that is very popular on social media for people in New York or L.A., that might not be the best for your practice.”

According to market trends from the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery, 3.5 million laser-, light-, and energy-based procedures were performed in 2018. The top five were for wrinkles (809,166), sun damage (786,856), facial redness (612,367), excess hair (385,466), and melasma (226,007). “Considering this data, when you start a practice, do you buy something for wrinkles or for sun damage right away?” Dr. Saedi asked. “Maybe, but you really need to gauge the market that you practice in. You also want to consider your own skill set and what other dermatologists in your area are offering. If you don’t want to do aggressive procedures, then purchasing a fractional CO2 laser might not be the best device to start off with. If you are not comfortable dealing with those patients, and potential infections and scarring, then that’s not the right treatment for you. You have to reflect on and identify what you’re comfortable learning and doing and managing.”

Taking time to investigate the services offered by dermatologists and med spas within a few miles of your practice can help you avoid redundancy. “Learn the techniques and the small nuances that will give you a little bit of finesse and make you an expert, to set you apart from other practices,” said Dr. Saedi, who coauthored a chapter in the book, “The Business of Dermatology” (New York: Thieme Medical Publishers, 2020). “I always recommend treating your staff and members of your family, to understand how you can tweak treatments to get the most out of them. Once you treat your staff, they are walking advertisements for what you do. They can also counsel patients, walking them through the healing process after a procedure, so they can know what to expect.”

Appropriate planning and preparation can help avoid acquiring the wrong device, she continued. This includes patient demand, scheduling availability, office space, overhead costs, and the level of staff training. She recommends buying one device at a time and clearing profitability from that device before purchasing another, “because it can be a burden on your practice to have multiple devices all at once,” she said. “You also have to think about the hidden costs – the maintenance and the service contracts. That can exceed $10,000 per year, so consider that when you’re looking to purchase a new device.”



Most people buy laser-, light-, and energy-based devices, but renting for a stretch can help you test the waters without a significant long-term investment. “It might not be the newest laser, but it can help you gauge how much of demand you have for that service to see if you have the patient base to make that larger step of purchasing the device,” she said. “If you buy a new device, make sure that it’s not a counterfeit and that you still have a company service contract. There are many third-party companies selling pre-owned laser aesthetics. Make sure you’re getting the authentic device and that there is some kind of a service contract with the actual manufacturer so they can help fix it when things break down.”

When Dr. Saedi counsels residents about purchasing devices, she typically recommends these five categories in order of preference: vascular, pigment, hair, resurfacing, and body contouring/skin tightening. “If you can cover vascular, pigment, and some kind of textural improvement, you can treat about 90% of aesthetic patients who come through your door,” she said. “Sure, there are some who may want skin tightening that you may not be able to offer with laser resurfacing, but you’re going to be able capture a high patient population by offering these services,” she added. That is why a lot of people end up getting a platform with attachable handpieces, “where you can have one system that is able to offer many different services right off the bat.”

She advised factoring in the amount of time it takes for a procedure and how much time it will take up in a certain room. “That will affect your revenue as well. Are you going to delegate this, or is this something you will do on your own? Take that into account.”

Above all, don’t rush your device purchase. “Some laser company sales representatives may pressure you at the end of a quarter by saying, ‘This is the best deal I’m going to offer you. You’re never going to get a deal like this ever again,’ ” she said. “I advise people to do multiple demos so you’re not just doing a demo for a day and seeing one or two patients. Treat the same patients again a month later. Do multiple demos so that you can feel comfortable. Talk to dermatologists who have the device, who have real experience with it, so you can have the most amount of information moving forward.”

Dr. Saedi reported that she has received equipment from Alma, Aerolase, Cartessa, and Cynosure. She is a consultant to and/or an advisory board member for those companies, as well as for Alastin.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM ODAC 2021

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article

Diagnosing, treating delayed nodules an imperfect science, expert says

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 02/03/2021 - 10:26

When a patient presents with a palpable nodule greater than 1 cm in diameter more than 2 weeks after injection of cosmetic filler, sorting out whether the culprit is an infection or an immune reaction is no easy task.

Dr. Terrence Keaney

“It’s sometime very difficult to distinguish between the two,” Terrence Keaney, MD, said during the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference. “Classically, an early-onset infection presents as a suppurative mass that’s fluctuant and tender. The challenge with delayed-onset infection is that it often does not tend to be fluctuant. It doesn’t resemble the classic infection you see in regular dermatology practice.”

Dr. Keaney, a dermatologist who is founder and director of SkinDC in Arlington, Va., said that the source of delayed infection could stem from inoculation at the time of injection – primarily via the skin microflora. “There are also rare case reports of mycobacterial infections from watered gauze,” which he said is why he does not use watered gauze in his practice. “This risk reinforces the importance of filler hygiene when you’re using dermal fillers. Isopropyl alcohol is often not enough. A lot of practices use chlorhexidine, avoiding its use around the eyes, to reduce the skin flora. Hypochlorous acid is another safe antiseptic for the face. You also want to be very careful with the needle or cannula tip not to touch your glove and to minimize going in and out of the skin so you’re not seeding the filler with bacteria.”

Other potential sources of a delayed infection described in the literature include a dental abscess, pimple popping, and subsequent injections from acupuncture or hyaluronidase.

When patients present with a nonfluctuant delayed nodule that shows no obvious signs of infection, however, the root cause can stump clinicians. “Is this infectious or not?” asked Dr. Keaney, who is also clinical associate faculty in the department of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington. “Is this a focus on chronic inflammation in response to the product, or is this a collection of chronic bacteria, a biofilm too large to be engulfed by a single cell?” A review of the topic found that three risk factors for the development of biofilms include the surface area of product (large boluses of filler), longevity of the product, and inadequate sterilization technique.

Dr. Keaney said that biofilms create an impaired immune system penetration, which boosts their resistance to antibiotics by 1,000-fold. “These bacteria also have a reduced growth rate, an altered microenvironment, and altered gene expression, so it makes it difficult to clear these biofilms.”

To determine if a delayed nodule is infectious or not, performing a biopsy with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis of tissue samples is ideal. “This would amplify the DNA by electrophoresis,” Dr. Keaney continued. “The problem is, it is often difficult to find labs to perform PCR. Also, you’re likely going to have to biopsy someone’s face. The patient is likely already upset that they have a delayed nodule. Ideally, you would want to avoid having to do a punch biopsy of a patient’s lip, tear trough, temple, or chin. The flip side of the coin is, how do you accurately determine if this is a noninfectious delayed nodule? If it is noninfectious, what is the mechanism of action?”

According to Dr. Keaney, short hyaluronic acid (HA) fragments can act as substrates for cell trafficking and can activate macrophages, dendritic cells, and T cells. In an analysis of immune cell response that used in vitro cell-based assays and was presented during a poster session at the 2018 Anti-Aging Medicine World Congress, researchers found no evidence of inflammatory or immune response to HA used for dermal fillers, regardless of size or formulation. However, physiologic degradation of HA to intermediate/small fragments tends to occur 4-5 months after injection.



“The hypothesis is that proinflammatory HA fragments may prime the immune system for an inflammatory response in the setting of a triggering event,” Dr. Keaney said. “The presence of an inflammatory reaction triggers an immune response to the HA fragments. Possible triggers include infections, dental procedures, and immunizations.”

The American Society for Dermatologic Surgery (ASDS) recently published a guidance regarding SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine side effects in dermal filler patients after three patients developed a reaction to the Moderna vaccine, in clinical trials. “One patient, a 29-year-old, had previous angioedema from a flu vaccine, so the question is: Is it truly a delayed nodule or an immunologic reaction to the ingredients in the vaccine?” Dr. Keaney said. Two other patients, a 51-year-old female and a 46-year-old female, developed facial swelling that were believed to be related to a previous filler injection. Both cases resolved.

“Is the COVID vaccine more of an immunologic trigger than other vaccines?” Dr. Keaney asked. “Are we going to see this more frequently? We may. We just don’t know the denominator. We do not know how many patients in the Moderna or Pfizer vaccine studies had been previously treated with dermal fillers. In patients who have had previous filler treatments, I’m still advising them to get the COVID vaccine if they can.”

Dr. Keaney’s algorithm for treating a delayed nodule that is fluctuant starts with culturing any exudate and beginning a course of empiric antibiotic therapy. “If it’s a nonfluctuant delayed nodule where you’re not sure if it’s related to a biofilm or to an immunologic reaction, there are multiple global consensus papers about this challenging condition in the medical literature,” he said. “Among the papers, there is no consensus treatment, even among consensus panels. They often recommend multiple antibiotic regimens when biofilm is the suspected culprit. For a noninfectious delayed nodule, they recommend prednisone or anti-inflammatory medications. If the nodule is recalcitrant to anti-inflammatory treatments, consider adding empiric antibiotic therapy or dissolve the product.”

In other specialties, the No. 1 priority of a biofilm infection is to get rid of the implant. In orthopedics, for example, the surgeon may remove the artificial joint, Dr. Keaney said. “If that delayed nodule is not responding to comprehensive antibiotic therapy or prednisone anti-inflammatories, you may consider dissolving the filler. The challenge is, there is wide variation in the ability of different hyaluronidase [products] and fillers to dissolve. Another concern is that you may make smaller, more immunogenic HA fragments by dissolving the filler.”

One approach for vascular occlusions introduced by Claudio DeLorenzi, MD, a plastic surgeon in private practice in Kitchener, Ontario, is to dissolve dermal fillers with high-dose pulsed hyaluronidase using up to 1,500 IU every hour. “In the U.S., hyaluronidase comes in 150-200-unit sizes,” Dr. Keaney said. “In my practice, it’s not enough to have one bottle of hyaluronidase. You need around 15-20 bottles to be able to treat for a vascular incident, but if you have a delayed nodule you may also have to use high doses of hyaluronidase.”

Dr. Keaney reported that he is a consultant to and/or an advisory board member for several pharmaceutical companies.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

When a patient presents with a palpable nodule greater than 1 cm in diameter more than 2 weeks after injection of cosmetic filler, sorting out whether the culprit is an infection or an immune reaction is no easy task.

Dr. Terrence Keaney

“It’s sometime very difficult to distinguish between the two,” Terrence Keaney, MD, said during the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference. “Classically, an early-onset infection presents as a suppurative mass that’s fluctuant and tender. The challenge with delayed-onset infection is that it often does not tend to be fluctuant. It doesn’t resemble the classic infection you see in regular dermatology practice.”

Dr. Keaney, a dermatologist who is founder and director of SkinDC in Arlington, Va., said that the source of delayed infection could stem from inoculation at the time of injection – primarily via the skin microflora. “There are also rare case reports of mycobacterial infections from watered gauze,” which he said is why he does not use watered gauze in his practice. “This risk reinforces the importance of filler hygiene when you’re using dermal fillers. Isopropyl alcohol is often not enough. A lot of practices use chlorhexidine, avoiding its use around the eyes, to reduce the skin flora. Hypochlorous acid is another safe antiseptic for the face. You also want to be very careful with the needle or cannula tip not to touch your glove and to minimize going in and out of the skin so you’re not seeding the filler with bacteria.”

Other potential sources of a delayed infection described in the literature include a dental abscess, pimple popping, and subsequent injections from acupuncture or hyaluronidase.

When patients present with a nonfluctuant delayed nodule that shows no obvious signs of infection, however, the root cause can stump clinicians. “Is this infectious or not?” asked Dr. Keaney, who is also clinical associate faculty in the department of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington. “Is this a focus on chronic inflammation in response to the product, or is this a collection of chronic bacteria, a biofilm too large to be engulfed by a single cell?” A review of the topic found that three risk factors for the development of biofilms include the surface area of product (large boluses of filler), longevity of the product, and inadequate sterilization technique.

Dr. Keaney said that biofilms create an impaired immune system penetration, which boosts their resistance to antibiotics by 1,000-fold. “These bacteria also have a reduced growth rate, an altered microenvironment, and altered gene expression, so it makes it difficult to clear these biofilms.”

To determine if a delayed nodule is infectious or not, performing a biopsy with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis of tissue samples is ideal. “This would amplify the DNA by electrophoresis,” Dr. Keaney continued. “The problem is, it is often difficult to find labs to perform PCR. Also, you’re likely going to have to biopsy someone’s face. The patient is likely already upset that they have a delayed nodule. Ideally, you would want to avoid having to do a punch biopsy of a patient’s lip, tear trough, temple, or chin. The flip side of the coin is, how do you accurately determine if this is a noninfectious delayed nodule? If it is noninfectious, what is the mechanism of action?”

According to Dr. Keaney, short hyaluronic acid (HA) fragments can act as substrates for cell trafficking and can activate macrophages, dendritic cells, and T cells. In an analysis of immune cell response that used in vitro cell-based assays and was presented during a poster session at the 2018 Anti-Aging Medicine World Congress, researchers found no evidence of inflammatory or immune response to HA used for dermal fillers, regardless of size or formulation. However, physiologic degradation of HA to intermediate/small fragments tends to occur 4-5 months after injection.



“The hypothesis is that proinflammatory HA fragments may prime the immune system for an inflammatory response in the setting of a triggering event,” Dr. Keaney said. “The presence of an inflammatory reaction triggers an immune response to the HA fragments. Possible triggers include infections, dental procedures, and immunizations.”

The American Society for Dermatologic Surgery (ASDS) recently published a guidance regarding SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine side effects in dermal filler patients after three patients developed a reaction to the Moderna vaccine, in clinical trials. “One patient, a 29-year-old, had previous angioedema from a flu vaccine, so the question is: Is it truly a delayed nodule or an immunologic reaction to the ingredients in the vaccine?” Dr. Keaney said. Two other patients, a 51-year-old female and a 46-year-old female, developed facial swelling that were believed to be related to a previous filler injection. Both cases resolved.

“Is the COVID vaccine more of an immunologic trigger than other vaccines?” Dr. Keaney asked. “Are we going to see this more frequently? We may. We just don’t know the denominator. We do not know how many patients in the Moderna or Pfizer vaccine studies had been previously treated with dermal fillers. In patients who have had previous filler treatments, I’m still advising them to get the COVID vaccine if they can.”

Dr. Keaney’s algorithm for treating a delayed nodule that is fluctuant starts with culturing any exudate and beginning a course of empiric antibiotic therapy. “If it’s a nonfluctuant delayed nodule where you’re not sure if it’s related to a biofilm or to an immunologic reaction, there are multiple global consensus papers about this challenging condition in the medical literature,” he said. “Among the papers, there is no consensus treatment, even among consensus panels. They often recommend multiple antibiotic regimens when biofilm is the suspected culprit. For a noninfectious delayed nodule, they recommend prednisone or anti-inflammatory medications. If the nodule is recalcitrant to anti-inflammatory treatments, consider adding empiric antibiotic therapy or dissolve the product.”

In other specialties, the No. 1 priority of a biofilm infection is to get rid of the implant. In orthopedics, for example, the surgeon may remove the artificial joint, Dr. Keaney said. “If that delayed nodule is not responding to comprehensive antibiotic therapy or prednisone anti-inflammatories, you may consider dissolving the filler. The challenge is, there is wide variation in the ability of different hyaluronidase [products] and fillers to dissolve. Another concern is that you may make smaller, more immunogenic HA fragments by dissolving the filler.”

One approach for vascular occlusions introduced by Claudio DeLorenzi, MD, a plastic surgeon in private practice in Kitchener, Ontario, is to dissolve dermal fillers with high-dose pulsed hyaluronidase using up to 1,500 IU every hour. “In the U.S., hyaluronidase comes in 150-200-unit sizes,” Dr. Keaney said. “In my practice, it’s not enough to have one bottle of hyaluronidase. You need around 15-20 bottles to be able to treat for a vascular incident, but if you have a delayed nodule you may also have to use high doses of hyaluronidase.”

Dr. Keaney reported that he is a consultant to and/or an advisory board member for several pharmaceutical companies.

When a patient presents with a palpable nodule greater than 1 cm in diameter more than 2 weeks after injection of cosmetic filler, sorting out whether the culprit is an infection or an immune reaction is no easy task.

Dr. Terrence Keaney

“It’s sometime very difficult to distinguish between the two,” Terrence Keaney, MD, said during the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference. “Classically, an early-onset infection presents as a suppurative mass that’s fluctuant and tender. The challenge with delayed-onset infection is that it often does not tend to be fluctuant. It doesn’t resemble the classic infection you see in regular dermatology practice.”

Dr. Keaney, a dermatologist who is founder and director of SkinDC in Arlington, Va., said that the source of delayed infection could stem from inoculation at the time of injection – primarily via the skin microflora. “There are also rare case reports of mycobacterial infections from watered gauze,” which he said is why he does not use watered gauze in his practice. “This risk reinforces the importance of filler hygiene when you’re using dermal fillers. Isopropyl alcohol is often not enough. A lot of practices use chlorhexidine, avoiding its use around the eyes, to reduce the skin flora. Hypochlorous acid is another safe antiseptic for the face. You also want to be very careful with the needle or cannula tip not to touch your glove and to minimize going in and out of the skin so you’re not seeding the filler with bacteria.”

Other potential sources of a delayed infection described in the literature include a dental abscess, pimple popping, and subsequent injections from acupuncture or hyaluronidase.

When patients present with a nonfluctuant delayed nodule that shows no obvious signs of infection, however, the root cause can stump clinicians. “Is this infectious or not?” asked Dr. Keaney, who is also clinical associate faculty in the department of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington. “Is this a focus on chronic inflammation in response to the product, or is this a collection of chronic bacteria, a biofilm too large to be engulfed by a single cell?” A review of the topic found that three risk factors for the development of biofilms include the surface area of product (large boluses of filler), longevity of the product, and inadequate sterilization technique.

Dr. Keaney said that biofilms create an impaired immune system penetration, which boosts their resistance to antibiotics by 1,000-fold. “These bacteria also have a reduced growth rate, an altered microenvironment, and altered gene expression, so it makes it difficult to clear these biofilms.”

To determine if a delayed nodule is infectious or not, performing a biopsy with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis of tissue samples is ideal. “This would amplify the DNA by electrophoresis,” Dr. Keaney continued. “The problem is, it is often difficult to find labs to perform PCR. Also, you’re likely going to have to biopsy someone’s face. The patient is likely already upset that they have a delayed nodule. Ideally, you would want to avoid having to do a punch biopsy of a patient’s lip, tear trough, temple, or chin. The flip side of the coin is, how do you accurately determine if this is a noninfectious delayed nodule? If it is noninfectious, what is the mechanism of action?”

According to Dr. Keaney, short hyaluronic acid (HA) fragments can act as substrates for cell trafficking and can activate macrophages, dendritic cells, and T cells. In an analysis of immune cell response that used in vitro cell-based assays and was presented during a poster session at the 2018 Anti-Aging Medicine World Congress, researchers found no evidence of inflammatory or immune response to HA used for dermal fillers, regardless of size or formulation. However, physiologic degradation of HA to intermediate/small fragments tends to occur 4-5 months after injection.



“The hypothesis is that proinflammatory HA fragments may prime the immune system for an inflammatory response in the setting of a triggering event,” Dr. Keaney said. “The presence of an inflammatory reaction triggers an immune response to the HA fragments. Possible triggers include infections, dental procedures, and immunizations.”

The American Society for Dermatologic Surgery (ASDS) recently published a guidance regarding SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine side effects in dermal filler patients after three patients developed a reaction to the Moderna vaccine, in clinical trials. “One patient, a 29-year-old, had previous angioedema from a flu vaccine, so the question is: Is it truly a delayed nodule or an immunologic reaction to the ingredients in the vaccine?” Dr. Keaney said. Two other patients, a 51-year-old female and a 46-year-old female, developed facial swelling that were believed to be related to a previous filler injection. Both cases resolved.

“Is the COVID vaccine more of an immunologic trigger than other vaccines?” Dr. Keaney asked. “Are we going to see this more frequently? We may. We just don’t know the denominator. We do not know how many patients in the Moderna or Pfizer vaccine studies had been previously treated with dermal fillers. In patients who have had previous filler treatments, I’m still advising them to get the COVID vaccine if they can.”

Dr. Keaney’s algorithm for treating a delayed nodule that is fluctuant starts with culturing any exudate and beginning a course of empiric antibiotic therapy. “If it’s a nonfluctuant delayed nodule where you’re not sure if it’s related to a biofilm or to an immunologic reaction, there are multiple global consensus papers about this challenging condition in the medical literature,” he said. “Among the papers, there is no consensus treatment, even among consensus panels. They often recommend multiple antibiotic regimens when biofilm is the suspected culprit. For a noninfectious delayed nodule, they recommend prednisone or anti-inflammatory medications. If the nodule is recalcitrant to anti-inflammatory treatments, consider adding empiric antibiotic therapy or dissolve the product.”

In other specialties, the No. 1 priority of a biofilm infection is to get rid of the implant. In orthopedics, for example, the surgeon may remove the artificial joint, Dr. Keaney said. “If that delayed nodule is not responding to comprehensive antibiotic therapy or prednisone anti-inflammatories, you may consider dissolving the filler. The challenge is, there is wide variation in the ability of different hyaluronidase [products] and fillers to dissolve. Another concern is that you may make smaller, more immunogenic HA fragments by dissolving the filler.”

One approach for vascular occlusions introduced by Claudio DeLorenzi, MD, a plastic surgeon in private practice in Kitchener, Ontario, is to dissolve dermal fillers with high-dose pulsed hyaluronidase using up to 1,500 IU every hour. “In the U.S., hyaluronidase comes in 150-200-unit sizes,” Dr. Keaney said. “In my practice, it’s not enough to have one bottle of hyaluronidase. You need around 15-20 bottles to be able to treat for a vascular incident, but if you have a delayed nodule you may also have to use high doses of hyaluronidase.”

Dr. Keaney reported that he is a consultant to and/or an advisory board member for several pharmaceutical companies.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM ODAC 2021

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article

RAP device cleared for short-term improvement in appearance of cellulite

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 02/02/2021 - 09:15

Soliton’s Rapid Acoustic Pulse (RAP) device, which was cleared for tattoo removal in 2019, has received FDA clearance for short-term improvement in the appearance of cellulite.

As described in a press release issued by Soliton, the RAP device emits rapid acoustic pulses (shock waves) that are transmitted through the skin at a rate of up to 100 pulses per second to rupture or “shear” the fibrotic septa. This causes the release of septa, which results in a smoothening of skin dimples. The procedure takes 40-60 minutes to perform.

“This is a novel, noninvasive treatment for cellulite that appears to be safe, with little pain and little downtime,” Mathew M. Avram, MD, JD, director of laser, cosmetics, and dermatologic surgery at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, said in an interview. “Further study and experience will determine the efficacy of this device and the optimization of its parameters going forward.”

In clinical trials that were part of the FDA’s 510(k) application process, patients underwent a single, noninvasive treatment that required no anesthesia and caused no unexpected or serious adverse events. The procedure also received strong patient satisfaction ratings, and clinical trial participants rated their average pain score as 2.4 out of 10.



Soliton plans to begin selling the device for both tattoo removal and cellulite treatment in the first half of 2021. “While the technology is broadly the same, the replaceable treatment cartridges [for tattoo removal and cellulite treatment] differ in significant ways,” Dr. Avram said.

Dr. Avram disclosed that he has received consulting fees from Allergan, Merz, Sciton, and Soliton. He also reported having ownership and/or shareholder interest in Cytrellis.

Publications
Topics
Sections

Soliton’s Rapid Acoustic Pulse (RAP) device, which was cleared for tattoo removal in 2019, has received FDA clearance for short-term improvement in the appearance of cellulite.

As described in a press release issued by Soliton, the RAP device emits rapid acoustic pulses (shock waves) that are transmitted through the skin at a rate of up to 100 pulses per second to rupture or “shear” the fibrotic septa. This causes the release of septa, which results in a smoothening of skin dimples. The procedure takes 40-60 minutes to perform.

“This is a novel, noninvasive treatment for cellulite that appears to be safe, with little pain and little downtime,” Mathew M. Avram, MD, JD, director of laser, cosmetics, and dermatologic surgery at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, said in an interview. “Further study and experience will determine the efficacy of this device and the optimization of its parameters going forward.”

In clinical trials that were part of the FDA’s 510(k) application process, patients underwent a single, noninvasive treatment that required no anesthesia and caused no unexpected or serious adverse events. The procedure also received strong patient satisfaction ratings, and clinical trial participants rated their average pain score as 2.4 out of 10.



Soliton plans to begin selling the device for both tattoo removal and cellulite treatment in the first half of 2021. “While the technology is broadly the same, the replaceable treatment cartridges [for tattoo removal and cellulite treatment] differ in significant ways,” Dr. Avram said.

Dr. Avram disclosed that he has received consulting fees from Allergan, Merz, Sciton, and Soliton. He also reported having ownership and/or shareholder interest in Cytrellis.

Soliton’s Rapid Acoustic Pulse (RAP) device, which was cleared for tattoo removal in 2019, has received FDA clearance for short-term improvement in the appearance of cellulite.

As described in a press release issued by Soliton, the RAP device emits rapid acoustic pulses (shock waves) that are transmitted through the skin at a rate of up to 100 pulses per second to rupture or “shear” the fibrotic septa. This causes the release of septa, which results in a smoothening of skin dimples. The procedure takes 40-60 minutes to perform.

“This is a novel, noninvasive treatment for cellulite that appears to be safe, with little pain and little downtime,” Mathew M. Avram, MD, JD, director of laser, cosmetics, and dermatologic surgery at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, said in an interview. “Further study and experience will determine the efficacy of this device and the optimization of its parameters going forward.”

In clinical trials that were part of the FDA’s 510(k) application process, patients underwent a single, noninvasive treatment that required no anesthesia and caused no unexpected or serious adverse events. The procedure also received strong patient satisfaction ratings, and clinical trial participants rated their average pain score as 2.4 out of 10.



Soliton plans to begin selling the device for both tattoo removal and cellulite treatment in the first half of 2021. “While the technology is broadly the same, the replaceable treatment cartridges [for tattoo removal and cellulite treatment] differ in significant ways,” Dr. Avram said.

Dr. Avram disclosed that he has received consulting fees from Allergan, Merz, Sciton, and Soliton. He also reported having ownership and/or shareholder interest in Cytrellis.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article