Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
  • Like
Face 2006 Radiesse Vs Restylane
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Now you can save presentations on your phone or tablet

Available for both IPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Face 2006 Radiesse Vs Restylane

  • 1,124 views
Published

RADIESSE® — For Volume and Contours …

RADIESSE® — For Volume and Contours
The treatment of individual wrinkles is often not enough to restore a youthful and fresh appearance. In order to counter the effects of gravity and regain a younger shape, the face needs real volume. This can be achieved with a dermal filler which also re-stimulates natural collagen production for effective and lasting volume.

Thanks to a special gel-matrix, Radiesse® volumising filler creates immediately visible results. With its fine calcium microspheres Radiesse® volumising filler stimulates the body's natural collagen formation to create long-lasting volume. The gel itself, as well as the microspheres, are completely broken down by the body over time.

Radiesse® volumising filler puts volume back exactly where it was. With gentle volumising deeper wrinkles and hollow or sagging cheeks disappear, and the natural facial contours return.

Dual effect volume formation
Immediate effect due to elastic gel-matrix
Long-acting effect thanks to collagen stimulation
Safe to use
Comprehensive clinical studies confirm effectiveness and tolerance
Ask your doctor what Radiesse® volumising filler can do for you

Published in Health & Medicine , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
1,124
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4

Actions

Shares
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Clinical Research Data
    • Split Face Study
    vs Restylane
  • 2.
  • 3. Facial Augmentation Nasolabial Fold Mental crease Jaw Line Chin Post-rhinoplasty Marionette Line Cheek Malar Radial Lip Lines
  • 4. Calcium Hydroxylapatite Gel carrier (~70%) Na carboxymethylcellulose Glycerine + H2O
    • Structural component (~30%)
      • Ca+2 PO4 ions
      • (Ca10(PO4)6(OH)2)
      • natural mineral
      • (identical to teeth & bone)
  • 5. Calcium Hydroxylapatite Macrophages dissolve gel carrier & fibroblasts form new collagen. Natural mineral non-antigenic, non-irritant, non-toxic metabolizes via homeostatic mechanisms
  • 6. WSRS = Wrinkle Severity Rating Scale No visible fold, continuous skin line. Absent 1 Shallow but visible fold with a slight indentation; minor facial feature. Implant is expected to produce a slight improvement in appearance. Mild 2 Moderately deep folds. Clear facial feature visible at normal appearance but not when stretched. Excellent correction is expected from injectable implant. Moderate 3 Very long and deep folds; prominent facial feature. Less than 2mm visible fold when stretched. Significant improvement is expected from injectable implant. Severe 4 Extremely deep and long folds, detrimental to facial appearance. 2-4mm Visible V-shaped fold when stretched Unlikely to have satisfactory correction with injectable implant alone. Extreme 5
  • 7. GAIS = Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale The appearance is worse than the original condition. Worse The appearance is essentially the same as the original condition. No Change Obvious improvement in appearance from the initial condition, but a touch-up or re-treatment is indicated. Improved Marked improvement in appearance but not completely optimal for this patient. A touch-up would slightly improve the result. Much Improved Optimal cosmetic result for the implant in this patient. Very Much Improved
  • 8. Split Face Study Radiesse vs Restylane (N=50)
    • Comparison of durability
      • Restylane vs Radiesse
    • Nasolabial Folds
      • Fold depth WSRS @ 3 or 4
      • Results from GAIS & Personal Score Card
    • Results @ 3, 6 and 9 months
      • Trial commenced June 2005
  • 9. Split Face Study Volume Comparison > 25% less volume <Volume required
  • 10. Split Face Study GAIS @ 6 Months
  • 11. Split Face Study GAIS @ 9 Months
  • 12. Split Face Study Personal Score Card
  • 13. Results after 1 st treatment Less volume
  • 14. vs Restylane
  • 15. vs Restylane
  • 16.