2023PubMedOpen access

OnabotulinumtoxinA versus PrabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs: A Randomized, Triple-blind, Split-face Study on the Time to Onset, Rhytid Appearance, and Patient Satisfaction in Forehead and Glabellar Lines.

Gabriella Vasile, Claudia Green, Hamza Bhatti, Muneeb Ilyas, Christopher D. Buckley, Eli Saleeby, Eduardo Weiss

Open full text 3 citations

Abstract

Background: Both onabotulinumtoxinA and prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs are FDA-approved formulations of botulinum toxin A for the treatment of glabella and forehead rhytids. Objective: We sought to compare the onset to action and patient satisfaction of onabotulinumtoxinA and prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs in treating dynamic rhytids of the forehead and glabella. Methods: Fifteen patients, aged 28 to 74, were enrolled and completed the study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive equal amounts of onabotulinumtoxinA and prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs injected to opposite sides of the face in the glabella and forehead at Day 0 by a blinded injector. Glabellar and frontalis muscle onset to action and rhytid appearance were blindly evaluated using photographs at Days 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 post-injection. Patients rated their satisfaction of left and right sides using a standardized scale. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in onset to action, rhytid appearance, and patient satisfaction after injection with onabotulinumtoxinA versus prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs in the corrugator and frontalis muscles. Although not statistically significant, a trend existed towards increased patient satisfaction with onabotulinumtoxinA. Conclusion: Both onabotulinumtoxinA and prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs are equally efficacious formulations of botulinum toxin type A for the treatment of glabellar and forehead rhytids.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Background: Both onabotulinumtoxinA and prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs are FDA-approved formulations of botulinum toxin A for the treatment of glabella and forehead rhytids. Objective: We sought to compare the onset to action and patient satisfaction of onabotulinumtoxinA and prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs in treating dynamic rhytids of the forehead and glabella. Methods: Fifteen patients, aged 28 to 74, were enrolled and completed the study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive equal amounts of onabotulinumtoxinA and prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs injected to opposite sides of the face in the glabella and forehead at Day 0 by a blinded injector. Glabellar and frontalis muscle onset to action and rhytid appearance were blindly evaluated using photographs at Days 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 post-injection. Patients rated their satisfaction of left and right sides using a standardized scale. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in onset to action, rhytid appearance, and patient satisfaction after injection with onabotulinumtoxinA versus prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs in the corrugator and frontalis muscles. Although not statistically significant, a trend existed towards increased patient satisfaction with onabotulinumtoxinA. Conclusion: Both onabotulinumtoxinA and prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs are equally efficacious formulations of botulinum toxin type A for the treatment of glabellar and forehead rhytids.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Background: Both onabotulinumtoxinA and prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs are FDA-approved formulations of botulinum toxin A for the treatment of glabella and forehead rhytids. Objective: We sought to compare the onset to action and patient satisfaction of onabotulinumtoxinA and prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs in treating dynamic rhytids of the forehead and glabella. Methods: Fifteen patients, aged 28 to 74, were enrolled and completed the study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive equal amounts of onabotulinumtoxinA and prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs injected to opposite sides of the face in the glabella and forehead at Day 0 by a blinded injector. Glabellar and frontalis muscle onset to action and rhytid appearance were blindly evaluated using photographs at Days 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 post-injection. Patients rated their satisfaction of left and right sides using a standardized scale. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in onset to action, rhytid appearance, and patient satisfaction after injection with onabotulinumtoxinA versus prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs in the corrugator and frontalis muscles. Although not statistically significant, a trend existed towards increased patient satisfaction with onabotulinumtoxinA. Conclusion: Both onabotulinumtoxinA and prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs are equally efficacious formulations of botulinum toxin type A for the treatment of glabellar and forehead rhytids.

Key concepts: Glabella, Forehead, Medicine, Patient satisfaction, Frontalis muscle, Onset of action, Botulinum toxin, Surgery

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
OnabotulinumtoxinA versus PrabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs: A Randomized, Triple-blind, Split-face Study on the Time to Onset, Rhytid Appearance, and Patient Satisfaction in Forehead and Glabellar Lines. — Research Paper | ScholarLens