↓ Skip to main content

Injectable facial fillers: imaging features, complications, and diagnostic pitfalls at MRI and PET CT

Overview of attention for article published in Insights into Imaging, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
24 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 Mendeley
Title
Injectable facial fillers: imaging features, complications, and diagnostic pitfalls at MRI and PET CT
Published in
Insights into Imaging, October 2017
DOI 10.1007/s13244-017-0575-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pravin Mundada, Romain Kohler, Sana Boudabbous, Laurence Toutous Trellu, Alexandra Platon, Minerva Becker

Abstract

Injectable fillers are widely used for facial rejuvenation, correction of disabling volumetric fat loss in HIV-associated facial lipoatrophy, Romberg disease, and post-traumatic facial disfiguring. The purpose of this article is to acquaint the reader with the anatomy of facial fat compartments, as well as with the properties and key imaging features of commonly used facial fillers, filler-related complications, interpretation pitfalls, and dermatologic conditions mimicking filler-related complications. The distribution of facial fillers is characteristic and depends on the anatomy of the superficial fat compartments. Silicone has signature MRI features, calcium hydroxyapatite has characteristic calcifications, whereas other injectable fillers have overlapping imaging features. Most fillers (hyaluronic acid, collagen, and polyalkylimide-polyacrylamide hydrogels) have signal intensity patterns compatible with high water content. On PET-CT, most fillers show physiologic high FDG uptake, which should not be confounded with pathology. Abscess, cellulitis, non-inflammatory nodules, and foreign body granulomas are the most common filler-related complications, and imaging can help in the differential diagnosis. Diffusion weighted imaging helps in detecting a malignant lesion masked by injected facial fillers. Awareness of imaging features of facial fillers and their complications helps to avoid misinterpretation of MRI, and PET-CT scans and facilitates therapeutic decisions in unclear clinical cases. • Facial fillers are common incidental findings on MRI and PET-CT scans. • They have a characteristic appearance and typical anatomic distribution • Although considered as safe, facial filler injections are associated with several complications • As they may mask malignancy, knowledge of typical imaging features is mandatory. • MRI is a problem-solving tool for unclear cases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 116 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 17 15%
Student > Postgraduate 13 11%
Student > Bachelor 13 11%
Researcher 7 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 6%
Other 27 23%
Unknown 32 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 59 51%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Engineering 2 2%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 35 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 November 2022.
All research outputs
#1,897,029
of 24,954,788 outputs
Outputs from Insights into Imaging
#79
of 1,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,833
of 328,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Insights into Imaging
#1
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,954,788 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,147 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,628 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.