Systematic review of “filling” procedures for lip augmentation regarding types of material, outcomes and complications

BackgroundThe ideal lip augmentation technique provides the longest period of efficacy, lowest complication rate, and best aesthetic results. A myriad of techniques have been described for lip augmentation, but the optimal approach has not yet been established. This systematic review with meta-regression will focus on the various filling procedures for lip augmentation (FPLA), with the goal of determining the optimal approach.MethodsA systematic search for all English, French, Spanish, German, Italian, Portuguese and Dutch language studies involving FPLA was performed using these databases: Elsevier Science Direct, PubMed, Highwire Press, Springer Standard Collection, SAGE, DOAJ, Sweetswise, Free E-Journals, Ovid Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Willey Online Library Journals, and Cochrane Plus. The reference section of every study selected through this database search was subsequently examined to identify additional relevant studies.ResultsThe database search yielded 29 studies. Nine more studies were retrieved from the reference sections of these 29 studies. The level of evidence ratings of these 38 studies were as follows: level Ib, four studies; level IIb, four studies; level IIIb, one study; and level IV, 29 studies. Ten studies were prospective.ConclusionsThis systematic review sought to highlight all the quality data currently available regarding FPLA. Because of the considerable diversity of procedures, no definitive comparisons or conclusions were possible. Additional prospective studies and clinical trials are required to more conclusively determine the most appropriate approach for this procedure.Level of evidenceIV.