A Pilot Study on the Treatment of Posterior Cheek Enlargement in HIV+ Patients With Botulinum Toxin A
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Posterior cheek enlargement in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)+ individuals can lead to significant cosmetic disfigurement. Both parotid gland and masseter muscle overlie the mandibular ramus, contributing to lower facial contour. However, posterior cheek enlargement has not been well characterized anatomically. There are also limited treatment options. Botulinum toxin is a highly efficacious minimally invasive option for improving the shape of the lower face. OBJECTIVE: A pilot study was undertaken to better characterize posterior cheek enlargement in HIV+ patients and explore treatment with botulinum toxin A. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five HIV+ patients with posterior cheek enlargement were treated with botulinum toxin A. Clinical, photographic, and radiological evaluations allowed the precise calculation of any change in volumes resulting from botulinum toxin A. RESULTS: All 5 patients had a good response with a mean decrease of 21.4% and 11.2% in the volumes of the masseter muscle and parotid gland, respectively. The effect was long lasting even at 6 months after injection and well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Botulinum toxin A may be a less invasive treatment of posterior cheek enlargement in HIV+ patients, with advantages of a good result that is long lasting with good tolerability and minimal risk.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".