44 research outputs found

    Why we should be avoiding periorificial mimetic muscles when injecting tissue fillers

    Get PDF
    Background: Tissue fillers are generally safe and well tolerated by patients. However, complications do occur and may be very severe, such as intravascular injection (with occasional residual tissue loss, visual and neurological sequelae) and late nodularity and swelling. Methods to lessen the likelihood of complications have been the subject of much recent literature. Depth of injection has been identified as a key safety consideration. Patients/Methods: The role of injection of facial filler into the muscular layer of the face is explored in this article. Literature was explored using available search facilities to study the role of injections in or around this layer in the production of significant adverse reactions. Results: A body of literature seems to suggest that injection into mimetic musculature of the face especially the musculature in the periorbital and perioral regions is prone to adverse reactions. Conclusions: Injection of agents into the perioral and periorbital mimetic muscular layer may produce, product clumping, displacement, and tendency to late nodularity and swelling. It also risks intravascular injection as compared to injection of other layers of the face. Injection into the mimetic muscles especially the sphincteric muscles should be avoided to minimize the risk of complications

    Photodynamic therapy followed by Mohs micrographic surgery compared to Mohs micrographic surgery alone for the treatment of basal cell carcinoma: Results of a pilot single-blinded randomised controlled trial

    No full text
    Introduction: Basal cell carcinoma is a common cutaneous malignant tumour. Surgical excision is the "gold standard" treatment for most subtypes, with Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) offering the highest cure rate. Other treatment modalities used include photodynamic therapy (PDT). Background: We aimed to study the efficacy of combining MMS with PDT to see whether this would reduce the number of stages and final defect size when compared with MMS alone. Materials and Methods: Our study was a single-centre, single-blinded, randomised and controlled pilot study involving a total of 19 patients. Nine patients were randomised to pre-treatment with PDT followed by MMS of whom two withdrew; the remaining 10 patients were randomised to the MMS alone. Follow-up visits were arranged at 3 and 6 months post-surgery. Results: In the PDT arm, five out of the seven treated patients (71%) had their initial tumour size decreased following PDT treatment prior to MMS. The average number of stages in the PDT arm was 1.85, compared to 2.5 in the MMS arm. The average number of sections in the PDT arm was 4.2, in comparison to 5.2 in the MMS arm. Conclusion: Our pilot study showed a promising but limited role for PDT as an adjunct in MMS in the treatment of selected cases of basal cell carcinomas. Larger trials, preferably multi-centred are required to further examine the role of this combination therapy
    corecore