A split‐face comparative performance evaluation of injectable hyaluronic acid‐based preparations HCC and CPM‐HA20G in healthy females

Abstract Introduction Skin revitalizers are used for skin quality improvement purposes. Hyaluronan hybrid cooperative complexes (HCC, Profhilo®, IBSA Pharmaceuticals) are an anti‐aging treatment with a large amount of pure hyaluronic acid (HA) based on stable, cooperative, and hybrid complexes. Cohesive polydensified matrix Hyaluronic Acid (CPM‐HA20, Belotero Revive®, Merz Pharmaceuticals GmbH) is a slightly cross‐linked HA (20 mg/ml) with glycerol (17.5 mg/ml). Aims To evaluate the performance of HCC and CPM‐HA20G for skin quality improvement in healthy female subjects. Methods This was a split‐face, single‐blinded study that enrolled 24 healthy female subjects. Injections were given on three separate occasions. HCC was injected on the right cheek, while CPM‐HA20G was injected on the left cheek. A battery of skin property measurements was used to evaluate the skin. Skin properties and overall satisfaction were analyzed using mixed models with the values at baseline, at week 1, week 8, and week 14 as an outcome and a random effect of subject and fixed effects of treatment, visit, and the treatment by visit interaction. Results Both products showed evidence of effect relative to baseline on surface hydration (AU), elasticity (N/m) TEWL (g/m 2 h), and melanin (AU). CPM‐HA20G also showed significant evidence of effect relative to baseline on water content (%), and HCC on pore count ( n ) and hemoglobin (AU). Satisfaction reported by the subjects themselves showed positive trends of satisfaction over time for multiple skin properties. There were no significant differences between the tested products in the observed skin characteristics over time. Conclusion These devices are effective and safe treatments for skin quality improvement, especially moisturization, with high patient satisfaction and generally mild and transient side effects.