MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224274878 · doi:10.1111/jocd.15013

Incidence and treatment of delayed‐onset nodules after VYC filler injections to 2139 patients at a single Canadian clinic

2022· article· en· W4224274878 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jason K. Rivers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmetic Dermatology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncidence (geometry)MedicineFiller (materials)SurgeryDermatologyPhysicsMaterials scienceOpticsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Data suggest that hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers using VYC technology have a higher incidence of delayed-onset nodule development at facial injection sites than earlier HA products. OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence of delayed-onset nodules with VYC products based on a single experienced injector. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with delayed-onset nodules after injections with VYC-20L, VYC-17.5L, and VYC-15L were identified by retrospective chart review. RESULTS: Since 2010, 2139 patients received injections from the same physician with combinations of VYC-20L (57.6% of patients; 2.4 syringes/patient), VYC-17.5L (23.9%; 1.5), or VYC-15L (18.5%; 1.5). Seven female patients (mean age, 62 years) developed delayed-onset nodules for an overall incidence of 0.33%. A potential inflammatory trigger (reported by 6 patients) occurred 1-168 days prior to nodule development. Nodule biopsy in 1 patient confirmed a foreign-body granuloma. The most effective treatment incorporated prednisone with or without hyaluronidase, and in 2 patients, nodules resolved spontaneously. The incidence of delayed-onset nodules was not associated with injection technique or amount of product used. CONCLUSION: VYC-associated incidence of delayed-onset nodules (0.33%) was lower than earlier estimates from previous studies. In the current analysis, VYC-15L had a rate of delayed reactions comparable with non-VYC products.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score0.804

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmetic DermatologySame topicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207