Indian Journal of Dermatology
  Publication of IADVL, WB
  Official organ of AADV
Indexed with Science Citation Index (E) , Web of Science and PubMed
 
Users online: 226  
Home About  Editorial Board  Current Issue Archives Online Early Coming Soon Guidelines Subscriptions  e-Alerts    Login  
    Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size Print this page Email this page
E-IJD®-DERMATOSURGERY ROUND
Year : 2015  |  Volume : 60  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 520

Safety and efficacy of growth factor concentrate in the treatment of nasolabial fold correction: Split face pilot study


1 Medico Laser, Paseo General Martinez Campos, 33, 28010 Madrid, Spain
2 Lokmanya Tilak Municipal Medical College and Hospital, Sion, Mumbai, India
3 Geetanjali Shetty's clinic, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Goregaon, Mumbai, India
4 Kasiak Research Pvt Ltd, DIL Complex, Ghodbunder Road, Thane, Maharashtra, India

Correspondence Address:
Satish M Totey
Kasiak Research Pvt Ltd, Building 1, DIL Complex, Ghodbunder Road, Thane West - 400 610, Maharashtra
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0019-5154.159628

Clinical trial registration CTRI/2012/05/002627

Rights and Permissions

Background : Growth factors have long been known as an effective treatment for facial wrinkles. We developed growth factor concentrate (GFC) from the platelets and evaluated their clinical outcome in nasolabial folds. Aims and Objectives : We evaluated safety and efficacy of autologous GFC on patients with nasolabial folds. Materials and Methods : Study was conducted on 80 patients for nasolabial folds in two groups. Group I (20) received bilateral single injection of GFC and group II (60) received single injection of GFC on the right side of the face and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) on the left side of the face. Severity of nasolabial folds was determined at the baseline and 3 months of follow-up visits based on wrinkle severity rating scale (WSRS), Global aesthetic improvement scale (GAIS) and atlas photographic grading at rest and at full smile. Objective clinical assessment and subjective satisfaction scale was determined for overall improvement at the end of the study. Results : In group I, 2 subjects showed improvement after GFC treatment with the score of 3.1-4 (76-100%), 3 subjects with the score of 2.1-3 (51-75%), 14 with the score of 1.1-2 (26-50%) and 1 subject with the score of 0-1 (<25%) at the end of study. In group II, 51 subjects were evaluated at the end of study where, 34 (66%) showed superior improvements after GFC, 6 (11%) patients showed similar improvement on both side of the face, 10 (19.6%) patients showed no noticeable improvement on the either side of the face and only 1 patient (1.96%) showed superior improvement for PRP at the end of the study. Overall improvement score analysis showed that GFC was significantly superior to PRP (P < 0.001). Conclusion : Present study is a strong evidence to support the use of GFC for nasolabial folds. The results showed that the single application of GFC is highly effective and safe.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed7170    
    Printed73    
    Emailed1    
    PDF Downloaded72    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal