Safety and Effectiveness of 2 High-G Prime Soft Tissue Filler for Chin Augmentation: A Prospective, Randomized, Comparator-Controlled, Evaluator-Blinded Trial

Background The chin is a crucial facial feature for overall attractiveness. Lower third imbalance can lead to signs of premature ageing, as well as loss of jawline contour. Effective chin augmentation using hyaluronic acid fillers have been demonstrated in the literature. Currently, however, no study in the literature has examined the comparison of safety and effectiveness of two high G’ fillers. Objectives The objective of this current study is to examine each’s effectiveness in the correction of chin retrusion through a prospective, randomized, comparator-controlled, evaluator-blinded trial Methods The aim of this study was to compare the safety and effectiveness of HASHA (Restylane Shaype) versus HAVLX (Juvederm Volux) for chin augmentation and correction of chin retrusion. A prospective, randomized, comparator-controlled, evaluator-blinded trial was conducted at a single research center. Fourty participants aged 18 years or older with mild to severe chin retrusion were included and randomized 1:1 to either HASHA (n = 20) or HAVLX (n = 20). The primary study endpoint was to examine differences in parameters associated with determining chin shape. Secondary endpoints included adverse events and patient satisfaction. Results Of the forty (40) participants enrolled in the trial, 37 (92.5%) were female and three (7.5%) were male. Although an independent-samples t-test revealed no statistically significant difference in total volumes of filler used with HAVLX (M = 1.85, SD = 0.69), or HASHA (M = 1.86, SD = 0.89); (p = 0.953). When focused on the menton/pognion injections, HAVLX required 15.27% more product when compared to HASHA (Mean: 1.48cc vs 1.27cc) (p=0.28). There was a statistically significant difference in efficiency score of correcting labiomental angle with the mean efficiency score for HASHA was 2.57 (SD: 1.67) and for HAVLX 1.50 (SD: 1.11) (p=0.02). Conclusions With no statistically significant difference in overall volume utilized between HASHA and HAVLX, HASHA injections required 15.27% less volume in the menton/pognion to achieve visual correction. Additionally, HASHA demonstrated a significantly higher efficiency score for correction of nasomental angle. Secondary endpoints were not significantly different and demonstrate both products as being safe and effective.