Clinical and radiographic features of facial cosmetic materials: A systematic review.

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

PurposeThe aim of this study was to systematically screen the literature for studies reporting cosmetic material in the oral and maxillofacial complex to shed light on the types of cosmetic materials, their radiographic appearance, and possible complications.Materials and MethodsFive electronic databases were reviewed for eligible studies. The general search terms were “cosmetic,” “filler,” “face,” and “radiograph.” Demographics, material types, clinical and radiographic presentation, and complications were recorded.ResultsThirty-one studies with 53 cases met the inclusion criteria. The mean age was 52.6±15.4 years with a 4 : 3 female-to-male ratio. The most common material was calcium hydroxyapatite (CaHa) (n=14, 26.4%), found incidentally. The materials were generally located within the upper cheek and zygoma (n=35, 66.0%), radiographically well-defined (n=44, 83%), and had no effects on the surrounding structures (n=27, 50.9%). The internal structure was radiopaque (calcification, hyperdensity) for gold wires, CaHa, bone implants, and secondary calcification or ossification. Outdated cosmetic materials or non-conservative techniques were infiltrative, had effects on the surrounding structures, and presented with clinical signs, symptoms, or complications.ConclusionConventional radiography, cone-beam computed tomography, and multi-detector computed tomography are useful to differentiate several cosmetic materials. Their magnetic resonance imaging appearance was highly variable. The infrequent inclusion of cosmetic materials in the differential diagnosis implies that medical and dental specialists may be unfamiliar with the radiographic appearance of these materials in the face.