Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Adverse reaction after hyaluronan injection for minimally invasive papilla volume augmentation. A report on two cases

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Bertl, Kristina ; Gotfredsen, Klaus ; Jensen, Simon S ; Bruckmann, Corinna ; Stavropoulos, Andreas. / Adverse reaction after hyaluronan injection for minimally invasive papilla volume augmentation. A report on two cases. I: Clinical Oral Implants Research. 2017 ; Bind 28, Nr. 7. s. 871-876.

Bibtex

@article{34cae7169ce940ac987ab0ee725f77a6,
title = "Adverse reaction after hyaluronan injection for minimally invasive papilla volume augmentation. A report on two cases",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES: To report two cases of adverse reaction after mucosal hyaluronan (HY) injection around implant-supported crowns, with the aim to augment the missing interdental papilla.MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two patients with single, non-neighbouring, implants in the anterior maxilla, who were treated within the frames of a randomized controlled clinical trial testing the effectiveness of HY gel injection to reconstruct missing papilla volume at single implants, presented an adverse reaction. Injection of HY was performed bilaterally using a 3-step technique: (i) creation of a reservoir in the mucosa directly above the mucogingival junction, (ii) injection into the attached gingiva/mucosa below the missing papilla, and (iii) injection 2-3 mm apically to the papilla tip. The whole-injection session was repeated once after approximately 4 weeks.RESULTS: Both patients presented with swelling and extreme tenderness with a burning sensation on the lip next to the injection area, after the second injection session. In one of the cases, a net-like skin discoloration (livedo reticularis) was also noted. The symptoms lasted for up to 7 days, and in both cases, symptoms resolved without any signs of skin or mucosal necrosis or any permanent damage.CONCLUSION: Most likely, water attraction over time by the highly hygroscopic HY, exerted progressively an external vascular compression and at least partial occlusion of neighbouring blood vessels. An infection or an allergic reaction seems unlikely, since all symptoms gradually disappeared within a week irrespective use of antimicrobials, while an allergic reaction most likely would not have been restricted to one side.",
keywords = "Case Reports",
author = "Kristina Bertl and Klaus Gotfredsen and Jensen, {Simon S} and Corinna Bruckmann and Andreas Stavropoulos",
note = "{\circledC} 2016 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.",
year = "2017",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1111/clr.12892",
language = "English",
volume = "28",
pages = "871--876",
journal = "Clinical Oral Implants Research",
issn = "0905-7161",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell Munksgaard",
number = "7",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Adverse reaction after hyaluronan injection for minimally invasive papilla volume augmentation. A report on two cases

AU - Bertl, Kristina

AU - Gotfredsen, Klaus

AU - Jensen, Simon S

AU - Bruckmann, Corinna

AU - Stavropoulos, Andreas

N1 - © 2016 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

PY - 2017/7

Y1 - 2017/7

N2 - OBJECTIVES: To report two cases of adverse reaction after mucosal hyaluronan (HY) injection around implant-supported crowns, with the aim to augment the missing interdental papilla.MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two patients with single, non-neighbouring, implants in the anterior maxilla, who were treated within the frames of a randomized controlled clinical trial testing the effectiveness of HY gel injection to reconstruct missing papilla volume at single implants, presented an adverse reaction. Injection of HY was performed bilaterally using a 3-step technique: (i) creation of a reservoir in the mucosa directly above the mucogingival junction, (ii) injection into the attached gingiva/mucosa below the missing papilla, and (iii) injection 2-3 mm apically to the papilla tip. The whole-injection session was repeated once after approximately 4 weeks.RESULTS: Both patients presented with swelling and extreme tenderness with a burning sensation on the lip next to the injection area, after the second injection session. In one of the cases, a net-like skin discoloration (livedo reticularis) was also noted. The symptoms lasted for up to 7 days, and in both cases, symptoms resolved without any signs of skin or mucosal necrosis or any permanent damage.CONCLUSION: Most likely, water attraction over time by the highly hygroscopic HY, exerted progressively an external vascular compression and at least partial occlusion of neighbouring blood vessels. An infection or an allergic reaction seems unlikely, since all symptoms gradually disappeared within a week irrespective use of antimicrobials, while an allergic reaction most likely would not have been restricted to one side.

AB - OBJECTIVES: To report two cases of adverse reaction after mucosal hyaluronan (HY) injection around implant-supported crowns, with the aim to augment the missing interdental papilla.MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two patients with single, non-neighbouring, implants in the anterior maxilla, who were treated within the frames of a randomized controlled clinical trial testing the effectiveness of HY gel injection to reconstruct missing papilla volume at single implants, presented an adverse reaction. Injection of HY was performed bilaterally using a 3-step technique: (i) creation of a reservoir in the mucosa directly above the mucogingival junction, (ii) injection into the attached gingiva/mucosa below the missing papilla, and (iii) injection 2-3 mm apically to the papilla tip. The whole-injection session was repeated once after approximately 4 weeks.RESULTS: Both patients presented with swelling and extreme tenderness with a burning sensation on the lip next to the injection area, after the second injection session. In one of the cases, a net-like skin discoloration (livedo reticularis) was also noted. The symptoms lasted for up to 7 days, and in both cases, symptoms resolved without any signs of skin or mucosal necrosis or any permanent damage.CONCLUSION: Most likely, water attraction over time by the highly hygroscopic HY, exerted progressively an external vascular compression and at least partial occlusion of neighbouring blood vessels. An infection or an allergic reaction seems unlikely, since all symptoms gradually disappeared within a week irrespective use of antimicrobials, while an allergic reaction most likely would not have been restricted to one side.

KW - Case Reports

U2 - 10.1111/clr.12892

DO - 10.1111/clr.12892

M3 - Journal article

VL - 28

SP - 871

EP - 876

JO - Clinical Oral Implants Research

JF - Clinical Oral Implants Research

SN - 0905-7161

IS - 7

ER -

ID: 52736260