Hyaluronic Acid Injections: Do They Really Work?

observational-study PMID: 35699361

Quick Summary: Research shows that hyaluronic acid injections can significantly improve skin hydration and elasticity. Two different types of injections were tested, and both showed positive results, with one showing slightly better outcomes.

What The Research Found

This study looked at how well two different hyaluronic acid (HA) injections improved skin. Both injections boosted skin hydration (moisture) and elasticity (bounce). The study found:

Both HA injections worked: They improved skin hydration and elasticity.

One might be better: One type of HA injection (HCC) showed slightly better results in hydration and elasticity compared to the other (CPM-HA20G).

Happy patients: Most people were happy with the results, with few side effects.

Study Details

Who was studied: 24 healthy women.

How long: The study lasted for about 3 months, with follow-up appointments.

What they took:

Right Cheek: One type of HA injection (HCC).
Left Cheek: Another type of HA injection (CPM-HA20G).
Both injections were given three times, spaced out over a few weeks.

What This Means For You

If you're looking for ways to improve your skin's hydration and elasticity, HA injections might be an option. Here's what you should know:

Improved Skin: HA injections can help make your skin feel more hydrated and look more youthful.

Quick Results: You might see improvements in a matter of weeks.

Safe: The study found that the injections were generally safe, with only minor side effects like redness or swelling that went away quickly.

Talk to a Doctor: Discuss with a dermatologist or qualified professional to see if HA injections are right for you.

Study Limitations

It's important to keep these things in mind:

Small Study: The study only included a small number of people, so the results might not apply to everyone.

Short-Term: The study only followed people for a few months, so we don't know how long the effects last.

Only Women: The study only included women, so the results may not be the same for men.

Different Injections: The study compared two different HA injections, so results may vary depending on the specific product used.

Key Findings

Both HCC (Profhilo®) and CPM-HA20G (Belotero Revive®) significantly improved skin hydration, elasticity, and trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL) compared to baseline. HCC demonstrated superior efficacy to CPM-HA20G in skin hydration (p=0.003) and elasticity (p=0.031) at week 14. Patient satisfaction was high (95.8% for HCC, 87.5% for CPM-HA20G), with mild, transient side effects reported.

Study Design

This was a split-face, single-blinded observational study involving 24 healthy females (age range unspecified). Each participant received HCC injections on the right cheek and CPM-HA20G on the left cheek across three sessions (baseline, week 4, and week 8). Outcomes were measured at baseline, week 1, week 8, and week 14. Statistical analyses used mixed models to account for treatment, visit timing, and interactions.

Dosage & Administration

HCC (Profhilo®): Administered via intradermal injections on the right cheek. Exact dosage unspecified in the summary, but typical protocols involve 2 mL per session.
CPM-HA20G (Belotero Revive®): Injected on the left cheek at a concentration of 20 mg/mL HA + 17.5 mg/mL glycerol, with dosing details unprovided.
Injections occurred at weeks 0, 4, and 8, with follow-up assessments at week 14.

Results & Efficacy

Skin Hydration (AU):
HCC: Increased from baseline (p<0.001) and outperformed CPM-HA20G at week 14 (p=0.003).
CPM-HA20G: Improved from baseline (p<0.001) but showed lower hydration levels than HCC.
Elasticity (N/m):
HCC: Significant improvement at week 14 (p=0.031 vs. CPM-HA20G).
CPM-HA20G: Modest gains, though less pronounced than HCC.
TEWL (g/m²/h): Both groups reduced TEWL (p<0.001), indicating enhanced skin barrier function, but no intergroup difference was statistically significant.
Safety: Adverse events (e.g., erythema, swelling) were mild and resolved within 7 days.

Limitations

Observational Design: Lower evidence quality compared to randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
Small Sample Size: 24 participants limit generalizability and statistical power.
Short Duration: Outcomes assessed only up to 14 weeks; long-term efficacy/safety unknown.
Single-Blinded Methodology: Potential bias due to participants knowing treatment sides.
Unspecified Dosage: HCC’s exact dose and injection technique were not detailed, complicating comparisons.
Demographic Gaps: Exclusively healthy females; results may not apply to males, older populations, or those with skin conditions.

Clinical Relevance

Injectable HA-based treatments (HCC and CPM-HA20G) effectively enhance skin hydration, elasticity, and barrier function, with HCC showing greater benefits. These findings support their use for non-surgical skin revitalization in healthy females, though the lack of dosage details and short follow-up period warrant caution in extrapolating results. High satisfaction rates suggest patient-perceived value, but the study does not address oral HA supplements or long-term maintenance protocols. Clinicians should consider individual patient goals and product characteristics when selecting between formulations.

Note: This analysis focuses solely on injectable HA products; oral supplementation mechanisms may differ.

Hyaluronic Acid Injections: Do They Really Work?