Objectives: Currently, various hyaluronic acids are being used to rejuvenate facial skin. There are few direct comparison studies between them. And there is no comparative study of Restylane versus Puragen. The objective of our study is to compare the effectiveness and complications of Restylane versus Puragen in the treatment of glabellar lines. Materials and Methods: Ten female patients were enrolled in this study. A half of the side was treated with Restylane and the other side was treated with Puragen. Two independent blinded observers reviewed the clinical photographs at 3, 6, 9, 12 months after the treatment and assessed for degree of improvement as well as complications. A Canfield Visia CR system was used to objectively evaluate the patient. Complications such as skin necrosis, infection, allergy, discoloration, telangiectasia, sterile abscess, granuloma were evaluated each follow up visit. Results: The two products were equally effective in producing an optimal cosmetic result, although at 6, 9 and 12 months post treatment, a higher proportion of patients showed over 50% improvement with Puragen than with Restylane. At 12 months post treatment, Puragen was considered superior in 70% of patients, whereas Restylane was superior in 10% of patients. There was no difference in 20% of patients. Treatment-related adverse events were not observed in any patients. Conclusions: Both Restylane and Puragen were equally effective in producing an optimal cosmetic result. Puragen provides a more durable esthetic improvement than Restylane in the treatment of glabellar lines.
View Synopsis (.doc format, 3732.0 kb)