Effectiveness and Safety of Hyaluronic Acid Gel with Lidocaine for the Treatment of Nasolabial Folds: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

[BACKGROUND] Hyaluronic acid (HA) gel is a widely used dermal filler for the correction facial volume loss. The incorporation of lidocaine with HA provides a pain-relieving alternative for individuals considering facial rejuvenation. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the effectiveness and safety of HA with lidocaine (HAL) with that of HA without lidocaine for the treatment of nasolabial folds (NLFs).

[METHODS] Studies were identified using the electronic databases PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science from inception up to January 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected based on the inclusion criteria. Outcomes included 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score, Wrinkle Severity Rating Scale score and adverse events.

[RESULTS] A total of 908 patients from 12 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. VAS score within 30 min after injection in the HAL group was much lower than that with just HA group (MD = - 28.83, 95% CI - 36.38 to - 21.28). There was no significant difference in effectiveness between the two products 24 months post-injection (MD = 0.13, 95% CI - 0.15 to 0.41). The main adverse events, such as swelling, erythema, bruising, itching and induration, also showed no significant difference.

[CONCLUSIONS] HAL is more effective for pain relief than HA alone, but both display similar effectiveness and safety for the correction of NLFs.

[LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II] This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .