Dysport Works Well as Botox Replacement in Wrinkle
Reduction but Not So Well for Seniors
Plastic surgeons find the new anti-wrinkle facial
filler safe, effective for most
Aug. 3, 2009 - There is good news and bad news for
senior citizens about the new alternative to Botox – Dysport. This new
anti-wrinkle facial filler did a good job of reducing frown lines
between the eyes, but, it does not seem to be as effective for people
age 65 and older, according to a study involving plastic surgeons at UT
Southwestern Medical Center.
“Our study confirmed that Dysport (abobotulinumtoxinA)
is a safe and effective tool in fighting wrinkles,” said
Dr. Rod Rohrich, chairman of plastic surgery at UT Southwestern and
one of the study’s authors. “It also confirmed that the dosage should be
tailored to one’s facial muscle mass to be most effective. So it’s
important to visit with a certified plastic surgeon to ensure the dosage
is correct.”
The study’s findings showed that Dysport was:
● Less effective for
people 65 and older;
● Most effective in
women;
● More effective for
African-American patients;
● Longer-lasting for
African-American patients; and
● As effective for those who had previously been
injected with a form of botulinum neurotoxin type A (such as Botox).
The Food and Drug Administration-approved study
involved 816 participants with moderate to severe frown lines (called
glabellar lines) at 27 centers in the U.S. The study is available online
and will appear in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.
Study participants, who kept diaries for the first
14 days after being injected, were given the Dysport facial filler or a
placebo. Surgeons injected Dysport in various levels, dependent on sex
and facial mass, at five facial points. Self-assessments and assessments
by independent reviewers were performed six times over a five-month
follow-up period.
Eighty-seven percent of people given Dysport
reported a reduction in wrinkles, compared with 5 percent of patients
taking placebos who reported an improvement. An independent assessment
showed improvement among 85 percent of patients receiving Dysport,
compared with 3 percent of patients receiving the placebo.
It was found that Dysport took effect as quickly as
24 hours, with the median time about four days. The facial filler lasted
7 percent longer in African-Americans (median of 117 days, compared with
109 days in the overall population) in blinded assessments, and 20
percent longer in African-Americans (129 compared with 107 ) according
to self-assessments by study participants.
The study also confirmed that dosing should be
adjusted according to a person’s facial muscle mass. Participants with
the smallest muscle mass had the largest response (96 percent) by 30
days. That rate dropped as low as 80 percent in people with the highest
facial muscle masses.
The study is the first to examine effects from
varying dose levels, which is more common in clinical practice, rather
than the standardized dosing used for FDA approval tests.
“Most studies have evaluated Dysport with a
standard dosage,” Dr. Rohrich said. “This study evaluated the safety and
effectiveness of different doses based on a person’s specific muscle
mass, which better mirrors what occurs in clinical practice. The size
and use of the muscles that produce frown lines varies among
individuals, so you want to customize treatment to the patient’s face.”
Dysport is a type of botulinum neurotoxin type A,
similar to Botox. Both work by blocking nerve impulses to the facial
muscles that create wrinkles. Dysport is produced by Scottsdale,
Ariz.-based Medicis Aesthetics. Dr. Rohrich is a member of the Reloxin
Investigational Group.
Aug. 3, 2009 - There is good news and bad news for
senior citizens about the new alternative to Botox – Dysport. This new
anti-wrinkle facial filler did a good job of reducing frown lines
between the eyes, but, it does not seem to be as effective for people
age 65 and older, according to a study involving plastic surgeons at UT
Southwestern Medical Center.