Botulinum toxin type A treatment to the upper face: retrospective analysis of daily practice

otulinum toxin type A treatment to the upper face: retrospective analysis of daily practice Review (2441) Total Article Views Authors: Prager W, Huber-Vorl nder J, Taufig AZ, Imhof M, Kühne U, Weissberg R, Kuhr LP, Rippmann V, Philipp-Dormston WG, Proebstle TM, Roth C, Kerscher M, Ulmann C, Pavicic T Published Date June 2012 Volume 2012:5 Pages 53 - 58 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CCID.S26550 Received: 29 February 2012 Accepted: 10 April 2012 Published: 11 June 2012 Welf Prager,1 Jürgen Huber-Vorl nder,2 A Ziah Taufig,3 Matthias Imhof,4 Ulrich Kühne,4 Ruth Weissberg,5 Lars-Peter Kuhr,6 Volker Rippmann,3 Wolfgang G Philipp-Dormston,7 Thomas M Proebstle,8 Claudia Roth,9 Martina Kerscher,10 Claudius Ulmann,11 Tatjana Pavicic12 1Dermatologikum, Hamburg, 2Fort Malakoff Klinik, Mainz, 3Praxisklinik für Plastische und sthetische Chirurgie, Cologne, 4 sthetische Dermatologie im Medico Palais, Bad Soden, 5Taimerhofstrasse 28, Munich, 6Aqua Medical Spa, Munich; 7Hautzentrum K ln, Cologne, 8Privatklinik Proebstle GmbH, Mannheim, 9K -Klinik, Düsseldorf, 10MIN Fakult t/Department Chemie/Kosmetikwissenschaft, Hamburg, 11Kosmas Klinik, Bad Neuenahr-Ahrweiler, 12Klinik und Poliklinik für Dermatologie und Allergologie, Munich, Germany Background: Botulinum toxin type A treatment has been used for over 20 years to enhance the appearance of the face. There are several commercially available botulinum toxin type A products used in aesthetic clinical practice. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to compare the clinical efficacy of the most commonly used botulinum toxin type A preparations in daily practice. Methods: Physicians from 21 centers in Germany completed questionnaires based on an inspection of subject files for subjects 18 years of age or over who had received at least two, but not more than three, consecutive treatments with incobotulinumtoxinA, onabotulinumtoxinA, or abobotulinumtoxinA within a 12-month period in the previous 2 years. Data on subject and physician satisfaction, treatment intervals, dosages, and safety were collected from 1256 subjects. Results: There were no statistically significant differences between incobotulinumtoxinA and onabotulinumtoxinA with respect to physician and subject satisfaction, dosages, and adverse effects experienced. Both botulinum toxin type A preparations were well tolerated and effective in the treatment of upper facial lines. Due to low treatment numbers, abobotulinumtoxinA was not included in the statistical analysis. Conclusion: The results of this retrospective analysis confirm the results of prospective clinical trials by demonstrating that, in daily practice, incobotulinumtoxinA and onabotulinumtoxinA are used at a 1:1 dose ratio and display comparable efficacy and safety.