Browsing by Author "Green, Jeremy B. (55074762700)"

Background: A previous injection algorithm termed the “Toxin Lift” was recently introduced and described volume increases in the midface following neuromodulator treatments of the jawline. Increase in midfacial volume due to soft tissue repositioning could also affect the severity of infraorbital hollows. Objective: The objective is therefore to evaluate whether the severity of infraorbital hollows can be improved by injecting neuromodulators in the supra-mandibular segment of the platysma. Materials and Methods: A total of 35 volunteers (11 males/24 females) with a mean age of 39.8 (9.6) years and a mean BMI of 25.2 (5.2) kg/m2 were investigated. Bilateral infraorbital regions were evaluated via clinical assessment and semi-quantitative 3D imaging. The applied injection technique targeted the platysma via four injection points administering 5 I.U. per injection point resulting in a total of 20 I.U. per facial side. Results: Volume increase of the infraorbital region was 0.13 cc at 15 days (p = 0.001) and was 0.02 cc at 30 days (p = 0.452) whereas the skin displacement in cranial direction was 0.54 mm at 15 days (p < 0.001) and was 0.31 mm at 30 days (p < 0.001). Clinical evaluation revealed a highly statistically significant improvement of the tear trough, palpaebromalar groove, and of the lid-cheek junction when compared to baseline with all p < 0.001. Conclusion: The results of this clinical prospective interventional analysis revealed that the “Toxin Lift” injection technique is capable to improve the clinical appearance of infraorbital hollows. The effects can be explained by the concepts of facial biomechanics. © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Background: Aesthetic neuromodulator injections of the upper face are frequently performed to temporarily block muscular actions of the periorbital muscles to ultimately reduce skin rhytids. However, the adverse event rate in the literature for toxin-induced blepharoptosis ranges from 0.51% to 5.4%. Objective: To identify access pathways by which injected neuromodulator product can travel from extra- to intra-orbital and therefore affect the levator palpebrae superioris muscle. Methods: Nine non-embalmed human body donors were investigated in this study with a mean age at death of 72.8 (16.1) years. The 18 supraorbital regions were injected in 28 times (14 for supratrochlear and 14 for supraorbital) with 0.5 cc, whereas eight cases (four for supratrochlear and four supraorbital) were injected with 0.1 cc of colored product. Anatomic dissections were conducted to identify structures stained by the injected color. Results: The results of this injection- and dissection-based study revealed that both the supratrochlear and the supraorbital neurovascular bundles are access pathways for injected neuromodulator products to reach the intra-orbital space and affect the levator palpebrea superioris muscle. Out of 36 conducted injection passes, seven (19.44%) resulted in affection of the sole elevator of the eyelid of which 100% occurred only at an injection volume of 0.5 cc and not at 0.1 cc. Conclusion: Clinically, the results indicate that a low injection volume, a superficial injection for the supraorbital location, and angling the needle tip away from the supratrochlear foramen (toward the contralateral temple) when targeting the corrugator supercilii muscles, can increase the safety profile of an aesthetic toxin glabellar treatment. © 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Background: Differences in the effectiveness of neuromodulator treatments for horizontal forehead lines dependent on depth of product administration have been described. However, knowledge in respect to the fascial anatomy of the forehead still remains elusive. Aims: To relate the fascial anatomy of the forehead to the effectiveness of neuromodulator treatments by conducting a clinical, prospective, interventional split-face study in which injections for the treatment of horizontal forehead lines are performed differently between facial sides. Methods: This study included a total of n = 14 patients with a mean age of 35.71 (7.8) years and mean body mass index of 21.9 (3.0) kg/m2. One side of the forehead was injected superficially by positioning the product in the superficial fatty layer, whereas the contralateral side was injected deep targeting the supraperiosteal plane (random selection). The treatment outcome was rated by the physician and by two independent observers according to a forehead line severity scale (0-4) at 14 and at 30 days. Results: All three observers agreed in their ratings (ICC: 0.942) that the deep injection technique resulted in a superior outcome: D14 (superficial vs deep) 0.17 (0.4) vs 0.14 (0.4; P =.583) at rest and 1.26 (0.6) vs 0.43 (0.5; P <.001) for frontalis contraction; D30 0.17 (0.4) vs 0.14 (0.3) at rest (P =.583) and 1.21 (0.6) vs 0.43 (0.5; P <.001) for frontalis contraction. Conclusion: The results of this study underscore how detailed anatomic knowledge can enhance results of aesthetic interventions, in this case horizontal forehead line treatment with neuromodulators. © 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC