ABSTRACT
Fillers represent a field of aesthetic medicine under remarkable expansion. Over the past few years, in the USA, there has been a huge increase in the use of fillers, especially for hyaluronic acid (400% in 2004). The causes of this increase have been the greater tolerability of this reabsorbable filler with respect to the others, and its prolonged efficacy in time due to chemical modifications of its molecular structure. In our study, we report the results of a double-blind comparative study between Puragen (latest-generation hyaluronic acid with double cross-linking) and Captique (second generation hyaluronic acid with single cross-linking), in the treatment of nasolabial folds. Each patient received Puragen in one nasolabial fold and Captique in the contralateral fold, at random. Clinical efficacy was assessed independently by the investigator and the patient 2, 4 and 6 months after baseline or when the optimal cosmetic result was obtained. The tolerability assessment was made by the patient (using a daily diary to record any adverse events) for 2 weeks after each treatment, and by the operator 2, 4, and 6 months after baseline. Sixty-eight patients completed follow up at 6 months. From the results obtained in this study, Puragen remained stably in the treated tissues even after 6 months while less satisfactory results were obtained with Captique.
