摘要
目的:系统评价用于治疗鼻唇沟加深的5种透明质酸填充剂,Juvéderm Ultra Plus、Restylane、Perlane、Elravie、BioHyalux的临床疗效与安全性。方法:检索中英文电子数据库中公开发表的对Juvéderm Ultra Plus、Restylane、Perlane、Elravie、BioHyalux的随机对照试验的文献。通过网络Meta分析方法比较透明质酸填充剂的相对及绝对疗效。结果:共纳入10篇文献。Juvéderm Ultra Plus在鼻唇沟改善的维持率上显著性的优于Restylane[RR=2.22,95%CI:(1.25,4.00)],Perlane[RR=4.35,95%CI:(2.44,7.69)]。Juvéderm Ultra Plus对于24周鼻唇沟评分改善的效果优于Restylane[MD=0.19,95%CI:(-0.21,0.59)]与Elravie[MD=0.21,95%CI:(-0.56,0.98)],但差异不具有统计学意义。结论:Juvéderm Ultra Plus在针对鼻唇沟加深治疗的临床疗效相对于其余几款同类型透明质酸填充剂产品较为理想。
Objective This study aimed to systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of five hyaluronic acid(HA)dermal fillers(Juvéderm Ultra Plus,Restylane,Perlane,Elravie and BioHyalux)for nasolabial folds(NLFs)improvement.Methods Chinese and English electronic database were searched for all RCTs evaluating the effectiveness of Juvéderm Ultra Plus,Restylane,Perlane,Elravie and BioHyalux.Network meta-analysis was used to compare the direct and indirect effectiveness these HA products.Results 10 studies were identified.Network meta-analysis indicated that the responder rate of Juvéderm Ultra Plus was significantly better than that of Restylane[RR=2.22,95%CI:(1.25,4.00)]and Perlane[RR=4.35,95%CI:(2.44,7.69)].For effectiveness of NLFs scores improvement in week 24,the results suggested that Juvéderm Ultra Plus was comparable to Restylane[MD=0.19,95%CI:(-0.21,0.59)]and Perlane[MD=0.21,95%CI:(-0.56,0.98)],but no significant difference was observed.Conclusion When compared to other HA dermal fillers,Juvéderm Ultra Plus could be a favorable option in terms of responder rate and NLFs score improvement.
作者
曲姝丽
叶翀
黄莹
陈向东
QU Shu-li;YE Chong;HUANG Ying;CHEN Xiang-dong(IQVIA,Real-World Insights,Shanghai 200041,China;Allergan China,Medical Aesthetic,Shanghai 200040,China;Department of Dermatology,Shanghai International Medical Center,Shanghai 201318,China)
出处
《中国美容医学》
CAS
2019年第11期18-22,共5页
Chinese Journal of Aesthetic Medicine
基金
艾尔建中国医学部经费支持
