Facelift filler injections results are very satisfactory for both patients and physicians. Facelift filler injection involve the use of two principal categories of temporary fillers approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for facial rejuvenation: hyaluronic acid and calcium hydroxyl apatite. The selection of HA implant is based on the indication and site of placement. For lifting and restoring volume and improving the structural foundations and facial contour, a high-density HA implant is injected deeply into the supra-periosteum. To treat medium-deep depression, we used a mid-density hyaluronic acid filler injected subdermal. For treating the periorbital area and the area around the lip, giving finished facial refinements, a low-density hyaluronic acid filler is selected with a water-like consistency filler. The most significant limitation of a filler is the cost. Each syringe can be expensive. The greatest benefit of a filler is accuracy. The other benefit is that a filler is bioinert and does not increase with a patient’s weight gain but obviously may not look good when a patient gains or loses weight as the filler has been injected to match a person’s current weight status.
Mouth and lips or perioral region filler injection rejuvenation results depend on understanding of both perioral anatomy and perceived signs of aging to put the correct treatment plane. The patient and physician need to understand the types of defects that can be improved using noninvasive techniques and those that require a surgical approach. There are several aspects to be considered when rejuvenating the lips, such as redefining the vermillion border, replenishing lost volume, and degree of poutiness. Volume augmentation can be beneficial for treating aging lips, marionette lines, deep nasolabial folds, aging chin, elevation mouth corner, pre-jowl sulcus, and jawline augmentation. It is also an excellent choice for correcting static wrinkles that it cannot treat with BoNT alone and re-contour.
Around the eyes or periorbital region filler vs fat injections results in depend on understanding both perioral anatomy and perceived sign of aging. Volume augmentation can be beneficial for treating deep nasojugal lines (often referred to as "tear trough" defects), the elevation of the temporal brow, and even smoothing fine eyelid wrinkling. It is also an excellent choice for correcting static wrinkles that it cannot treat with BoNT alone and re-contour. Which filler substance is considered "best" or "preferred" for you depends on the doctor's technique, skill, experience, training, facial needs, and risk tolerance? It has nothing to do with headlines in the media; these are often a result of its marketing. While synthetic fillers can smooth out wrinkles and folds, they cannot restore fullness that is naturally lost as fat and bone diminish, and it is not for everyone. Some individuals are allergic to synthetic materials and may develop an allergic reaction. Nevertheless, its use stays limited compared to commercial fillers. It appears that surgically trained and oriented cosmetic practitioners are far more likely to use fat. In large numbers, less surgically dermatologists, non-surgically trained "cosmetic practitioners," and non-physician "extenders" such as physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and even simple registered nurses favor synthetic fillers over autologous permanent fat filling injections.
%d bloggers like this: