J Clin Exp Dent. 2012;4(4):e244-7.

Foreign body granulomatous reactions.

Journal section: Oral Medicine and Pathology doi:10.4317/jced.50868

Publication Types: Review http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.50868

Foreign body granulomatous reactions to cosmetic fillers

Laura Carlos-Fabuel, Cristina Marzal-Gamarra, Silvia Martí-Álamo, Aisha Mancheño-Franch

DDS. Master in Oral Medicine and Surgery. University of Valencia. Valencia (Spain).

Correspondence:
Clínica Odontológica
Gascó Oliag 1
46021 – Valencia (Spain)
E-mail: [email protected]

Carlos-Fabuel L, Marzal-Gamarra C, Martí-Álamo S, Mancheño-Franch

A. Foreign body granulomatous reactions to cosmetic fillers. J Clin Exp
Received: 02/05/2012 Dent. 2012;4(4):e244-7.
Accepted: 04/05/2012 http://www.medicinaoral.com/odo/volumenes/v4i4/jcedv4i4p244.pdf

Article Number: 50868 http://www.medicinaoral.com/odo/indice.htm

© Medicina Oral S. L. C.I.F. B 96689336 - eISSN: 1989-5488
eMail: [email protected]
Indexed in:
Scopus
DOI® System

Abstract
Introduction: The use of different facial cosmetic fillers has increased in recent years. The introduction of appa-
rently inert substances in the epidermis can give rise to foreign body granulomatous reactions.
Objetives: A literature review is made of the foreign body granulomatous reactions to cosmetic fillers.
Material and Methods: A PubMed-Medline search was made using the following keywords: “granulomatous reac-
tions”, “foreign body reactions”, “esthetic fillers”, “cosmetic fillers”. The search was limited to articles published
in English and Spanish during the last 10 years. A total of 22 articles were reviewed.
Results: A great variety of substances have been found to give rise to foreign body granulomatous reactions. The
most common locations are the upper and lower lip and the nasogenian sulcus. The clinical presentation is variable
and can range from single or multiple nodules to diffuse facial swelling of hard-elastic consistency, accompanied
by reddening. Most lesions are asymptomatic or cause only mild discomfort. The literature describes different
treatments, including systemic corticosteroids, local tacrolimus infiltrations, minocycline, retinoids, allopurinol,
5% imiquimod, and surgical removal.
Conclusions: In view of the current demand for esthetic treatments, the use of cosmetic fillers can be expected to
increase in future, together with the incidence of complications.

Key words: Esthetic fillers, granulomatous reactions, foreign body reactions, cosmetic fillers.

e244
J Clin Exp Dent. 2012;4(4):e244-7. Foreign body granulomatous reactions.

Introduction Results
The use of different facial cosmetic fillers has increased A great variety of substances have been found to give
in recent years (1-8). However, the introduction of appa- rise to foreign body granulomatous reactions. The most
rently inert substances in the epidermis can give rise popular include: silicone, collagen, hyaluronic acid ei-
to foreign body granulomatous reactions, among other ther alone or with acrylic gel (Dermalive®), polymethyl-
undesirable effects (1, 2, 5). This has led to the develo- methacrylate (Artecoll®, Arteplast®), polylactic acid,
pment of many new filler materials. However, despite hydroxyapatite and polyalkylamide (Bio-Alcamid®).
the incorporated improvements, which have contributed The most common locations are the upper and lower lip
to reduce the number of complications, no ideal product and the nasogenian sulcus. The clinical presentation is
has been developed to date. Such an ideal product should variable and can range from single or multiple nodules
be biocompatible (i.e., with a low foreign body reaction to diffuse facial swelling of hard-elastic consistency, ac-
risk), easy to inject, non-allergenic, inert and unable to companied by reddening. Most lesions are asymptomatic
migrate or displace after injection (1, 9-12). or cause only mild discomfort. The literature describes
Different filler classifications have been proposed, ac- different treatments, including systemic corticosteroids
cording to the origin, durability and biodegradability (prednisone), local tacrolimus infiltrations, minocycline,
of the product. In this context, filler materials can be retinoids (isotretinoin), allopurinol, 5% imiquimod, and
classified as reabsorbable (i.e., those in which tissue surgical removal.
volume expansion after injection lasts a maximum of
4-6 months), semi-permanent (lasting about 18 months) Discussion
or permanent (i.e., materials that cannot be eliminated) Independently of the filler material used, the mechanism
(3,4,7-9,11-13). Table 1 describes the materials that are of action and purpose are similar in all cases. The injec-
currently available and their classification according to ted product induces a reaction of the surrounding con-
the durability of the filling effect. nective tissue, with the depositing of more or less stable
collagen that persists independently of phagocytosis of
Objectives the filler material. The underlying mechanism of action
The present study offers a literature review of the foreign remains unclear, though infection has been suggested to
body granulomatous reactions to cosmetic fillers. trigger an immune cross-reaction, or alternatively dela-
yed immunity may be induced. In all cases, the objective
Material and Methods of the filler material is to expand soft tissue volume.
A PubMed-Medline literature search was made using Foreign body granulomatous reactions develop after
the following keywords: “granulomatous reactions”, a variable period of time ranging from 5 months to 15
“foreign body reactions”, “esthetic fillers”, “cosmetic years (2). Sanchis-Bielsa et al. (1) reported an average
fillers”. time to reaction of 7.1 years. In the series published by
The search was limited to articles published in English Lombardi et al. (8), the mean time to symptoms onset
and Spanish during the last 10 years. was 1.5 years, while Ficarra et al. (10) recorded a mean
A total of 22 articles were reviewed: one cross-sectional of 4.5 years. Other studies have described longer latency
study, a cohort study, 9 clinical case series, 9 clinical periods of 4 or 5 years.
cases and two review articles. Adverse reactions have been reported with practically
all the products used. Silicone was the first product em-

NON-PERMANENT SEMI-PERMANENT PERMANENT

Material Commercial Material Commercial Material Commercial brand
brand examples brand examples examples
Collagen Zyderm®, Polylactic acid New-Fill® Silicone Bioplastique®,
Zyplast® Silikon®

Hyaluronic acid Restylane®, Calcium Radiesse® Hydroxy-ethyl-methacrylate Dermalive®

derivatives Perlane®, hydroxyapatite
Hyaloform®
Dextran Reviderm® Polymethylmethacrylate Artecoll®,
Arteplast®
Hydroxypolyvinyl Evolution®
Polyacrylamide Aquamid®,
Bio-Formacryl®
Polyalkylamide Bio-Alcamid®
Table 1. Filler materials are currently available and their classification according to the durability of the filling effect.
e245
J Clin Exp Dent. 2012;4(4):e244-7. Foreign body granulomatous reactions.

ployed on a large scale, and therefore accounts for most many cases is unavoidable (17).
of the reported undesirable effects and the most virulent Minocycline has yielded favorable results as a result of
reactions. The term “siliconoma” has been used in refe- its antiinflammatory and immune modulating properties
rence to the orofacial granulomatous reactions produced and anti-granulomatous effects, as demonstrated in vi-
by silicone infiltration. tro.
Systemic toxicity has been suggested with some of these Allopurinol has also been used in the treatment of sar-
filler products, particularly silicone, since deposits of the coidosis and granulomas related to the use of cosmetic
material have been found in liver, spleen and kidneys filler materials. In turn, while broad-spectrum antibiotic
after subcutaneous injection. However, no relation to use has been reported, its efficacy has been questioned
connective tissue diseases or other disorders has been (12, 18, 19).
established. Other treatment proposals include 5% imiquimod (2, 20)
Local toxicity includes pain, edema, ecchymosis, erythe- and hyaluronidase in the case of granulomas secondary
ma, color changes, alterations in skin texture, overco- to hyaluronic acid infiltrations (21, 22).
rrection effects and local embolic phenomena. There
have also been descriptions of extensive ulcerations that References
can affect bone, muscle and nerve structures (14). 1. Sanchis-Bielsa JM, Bagán JV, Poveda R, Salvador I. Foreign
body granulomatous reactions to cosmetic fillers: a clinical study
The clinical manifestations include swelling or tumefac- of 15 cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod.
tion of normally hard consistency. There have also been 2009;108:237-41.
reports of reddening, burning sensation, tenderness in 2. Poveda R, Bagán JV, Murillo J, Jiménez Y. Granulomatous facial
response to palpation and mild inflammation or even fi- reaction to injected cosmetic fillers--a presentation of five cases.
Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2006;11:E1-5.
brous reactions. Sanchis-Bielsa et al. (1) found most pa- 3. Al-Shraim M, Jaragh M, Geddie W. Granulomatous reaction to
tients to be asymptomatic – the reason for consultation injectable hyaluronic acid (Restylane) diagnosed by fine needle
being the presence of subcutaneous nodules, inflamma- biopsy. J Clin Pathol. 2007;60:1060-1.
tion and deformation. They recorded no serious conse- 4. Angus JE, Affleck AG, Leach IH, Millard LG. Two cases of delayed
granulomatous reactions to the cosmetic filler Dermalive, a hyalu-
quences in their patients, though there were cases of im- ronic acid and acrylic hydrogel. Br J Dermatol. 2006;155:1077-8.
portant facial deformity, epidermal necrosis or extensive 5. Edwards PC, Fantasia JE. Review of long-term adverse effects
deformation after subcutaneous silicone infiltration. associated with the use of chemically-modified animal and no-
The histological findings are characteristic, with giant nanimal source hyaluronic acid dermal fillers. Clin Interv Aging.
2007;2:509-19.
multinucleated cells reflecting foreign body reactions. 6. Sidwell RU, Dhillon AP, Butler PE, Rustin MH. Localized granu-
Silicone infiltrations usually show abundant macropha- lomatous reaction to a semi-permanent hyaluronic acid and acrylic
ges with intracytoplasmic vacuoles (15). Other products hydrogel cosmetic filler. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2004;29:630-2.
in turn induce classical foreign body granulomas in 7. Gafni-Kane A, Sand PK. Foreign-body granuloma after injection
of calcium hydroxyapatite for type III stress urinary incontinence.
which fibrotic phenomena are also observed, along with Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118:418-21.
violet-colored material deposits, asteroid bodies and his- 8. Lombardi T, Samson J, Plantier F, Husson C, Küffer R. Orofacial
tiocyte infiltrates (16). granulomas after injection of cosmetic fillers. Histopathologic and
The differential diagnosis should include erysipela, clinical study of 11 cases. J Oral Pathol Med. 2004;33:115-20.
9. Gómez-de la Fuente E, Alvarez-Fernández JG, Pinedo F, Naz E,
allergic contact dermatitis, facial edema with eosino- Gamo R, Vicente-Martín FJ, López-Estebaranz JL. [Cutaneous
philia, apostematous glandularis cheilitis, Ascher syn- adverse reaction to Bio-Alcamid implant]. Actas Dermosifiliogr.
drome, orofacial granulomatosis, Melkersson-Rosenthal 2007;98:271-5.
syndrome, sarcoidosis, cutaneous leishmaniasis, leprosy 10. Ficarra G, Mosqueda-Taylor A, Carlos R. Silicone granuloma of
the facial tissues: a report of seven cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral
or tuberculosis. Cases manifesting as well defined lip Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2002;94:65-73.
nodules are suggestive of salivary gland tumors or cysts, 11. Requena C, Izquierdo MJ, Navarro M, Martínez A, Vilata JJ, Bote-
such as mucoceles, as well as soft tissue tumors and lla R, Amorrortu J, Sabater V, Aliaga A, Requena L. Adverse reac-
cysts (2, 10, 12). tions to injectable aesthetic microimplants. Am J Dermatopathol.
2001;23:197-202.
Etiological treatment (i.e., removal of the injected mate- 12. Jham BC, Nikitakis NG, Scheper MA, Papadimitriou JC, Levy
rial) poses difficulties. Symptomatic treatment has inclu- BA, Rivera H. Granulomatous foreign-body reaction involving
ded local and systemic corticosteroids (prednisolone 1 oral and perioral tissues after injection of biomaterials: a series
mg/kg/day during 4-6 weeks, followed by gradual dose of 7 cases and review of the literature. J Oral Maxillofac Surg.
2009;67:280-5.
reduction). Corticosteroid injections inhibit fibroblast 13. Arin MJ, Bäte J, Krieg T, Hunzelmann N. Silicone granulo-
activity and the depositing of collagen, macrophage ac- ma of the face treated with minocycline. J Am Acad Dermatol.
tivity and the formation of giant cells – avoiding pain 2005;52:53-6.
and swelling in most cases. However, corticosteroids 14. Mastruserio DN, Pesqueira MJ, Cobb MW. Severe granulomatous
reaction and facial ulceration occurring after subcutaneous silicone
can produce surrounding skin atrophy secondary to the injection. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1996;34(5 Pt 1):849-52.
inhibition of fibroblasts and keratinocyte activity. The- 15. Mustacchio V, Cabibi D, Minervini MI, Barresi E, Amato S. A
se side effects are dose-dependent, and skin atrophy in diagnostic trap for the dermatopathologist: granulomatous reac-
tions from cutaneous microimplants for cosmetic purposes. J Cutan
e246
J Clin Exp Dent. 2012;4(4):e244-7. Foreign body granulomatous reactions.

Pathol. 2007;34:281-3.
16. Zimmermann US, Clerici TJ. The histological aspects of fillers
complications. Semin Cutan Med Surg. 2004;23:241-50.
17. Conejo-Mir JS, Sanz Guirado S, Angel Muñoz M. Adverse granu-
lomatous reaction to Artecoll treated by intralesional 5-fluorouracil
and triamcinolone injections. Dermatol Surg. 2006;32:1079-81.
18. Alijotas-Reig J, Garcia-Gimenez V, Miró-Mur F, Vilardell-Tarrés
M. Delayed immune-mediated adverse effects related to pol-
yacrylamide dermal fillers: clinical findings, management, and
follow-up. Dermatol Surg. 2009;35:360-6.
19. Alijotas-Reig J, Miró-Mur F, Planells-Romeu I, Garcia-Aranda N,
Garcia-Gimenez V, Vilardell-Tarrés M. Are bacterial growth and/
or chemotaxis increased by filler injections? Implications for the
pathogenesis and treatment of filler-related granulomas. Dermato-
logy. 2010;221:356-64. Epub 2010 Nov 15.
20. Baumann LS, Halem ML. Lip silicone granulomatous foreign
body reaction treated with aldara (imiquimod 5%). Dermatol Surg.
2003;29:429-32.
21. Brody HJ. Use of hyaluronidase in the treatment of granulomatous
hyaluronic acid reactions or unwanted hyaluronic acid misplace-
ment. Dermatol Surg. 2005;31:893-7.
22. Alijotas-Reig J, Garcia-Gimenez V. Delayed immune-mediated ad-
verse effects related to hyaluronic acid and acrylic hydrogel dermal
fillers: clinical findings, long-term follow-up and review of the lite-
rature. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2008;22:150-61.

e247