Home > Journals > Italian Journal of Dermatology and Venereology > Past Issues > Giornale Italiano di Dermatologia e Venereologia 2009 June;144(3) > Giornale Italiano di Dermatologia e Venereologia 2009 June;144(3):271-9

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints
Permissions
Share

 

  CONTROVERSIES IN DERMATOLOGY SURGERY 

Giornale Italiano di Dermatologia e Venereologia 2009 June;144(3):271-9

Copyright © 2009 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Injectable fillers: an American perspective

Curcio N. M. 1, Parish L. C. 2

1 Division of Dermatology, Department of Medicine Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA 2 Clinical Professor of Dermatology and Cutaneous Biology and Director of the Jefferson Center for International Dermatology Jefferson Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University Philadelphia, PA, USA


PDF


Since 1981, there has been a significant repertoire of United States Food and Drug Administrtion (FDA) approved fillers for both cosmetic rejuvenation and facial lipoatrophy. Currently available dermal fillers include bovine, human and porcine collagens, hyaluronic acids of animal and biosynthetic origin, poly-L-lactic acid, calcium hydroxylapatite, and polymethylmethacrylate. Many of these fillers were first available in Europe and Canada before their arrival in the United States (USA) and many of the complications known about these products have come from studies conducted both in the USA and abroad. Several of the fillers that are currently available abroad or are used in the USA off-label have been associated with significant complications. The authors review three of these fillers: liquid injectable silicone, DermaLive/DermaDeep, and Bio-Alcamid.

top of page