The Aesthetic Guide is part of the Informa Markets Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Study shows polyacrylamide hydrogel compares well with HA in nasolabial procedures

Article-Study shows polyacrylamide hydrogel compares well with HA in nasolabial procedures

New York — According to results of a new study, the investigational injectable filler 2.5 percent polyacrylamide hydrogel (Aquamid) is as effective and well-tolerated as hyaluronic acid (HA, Restylane) for the correction of nasolabial folds, reports Medical News Today.

The study, conducted by researchers at the New York University School of Medicine, suggests that polyacrylamide hydrogel was as effective as HA at six months on the widely validated Wrinkle Assessment Scale (WAS), the study’s primary endpoint. Efficacy was maintained at the 12-month follow-up evaluation.

Medical News Today quotes Rhoda Narins, M.D., clinical professor of dermatology at NYU School of Medicine, as saying, "Our results demonstrate that polyacrylamide hydrogel shows strong potential as a permanent soft tissue filler," adding that because polyacrylamide hydrogel is non-biodegradable and does not migrate, it is expected that efficacy will continue over a longer period than with HA. Dr. Narins and colleagues compared the efficacy and safety of polyacrylamide hydrogel to HA in 315 men and women who presented for bilateral soft tissue augmentation of the nasal labial folds and had a WAS of 3 or 4. The primary efficacy measure was the mean change in WAS scores at six months. The study found that the average WAS improvement at six months in the polyacrylamide hydrogel group was 1.8 points, as compared with 2.0 in the HA group.

"This means that the improvement in both groups was more than triple the minimum clinically relevant difference of 0.5 points," Dr. Narins is quoted as saying. The study found that type and frequency of treatment-related side effects were similar with the two fillers. Side effects were usually mild and transient and occurred as a result of the injection procedure.

Study results also suggest a benefit for polyacrylamide hydrogel beyond its favorable safety and efficacy: Because the filler is non-biodegradable and not resorbed, the patient does not require periodic re-injections. The study’s authors emphasize that while the study results are promising for use of polyacrylamide hydrogel, longer follow-up is needed to establish whether favorable one-year results hold up over a longer period of time.

Hide comments


  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.