Trial reportAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Final Report on the Safety and Efficacy of Poly-L-Lactic Acid Filler (Gana V) Injection for the Correction of Nasolabial Fold: A Double-Blind, Non-Inferiority, Randomized, Split-Face Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05215054 (Clinical Study for the Safety and Effectiveness of Use of an Injectable Medical Device GANA V® for Facial Aesthetic Treatment), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Clinical Study for the Safety and Effectiveness of Use of an Injectable Medical Device GANA V® for Facial Aesthetic Treatment
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Outcomes of an Innovative Poly-L-Lactic Acid (LASYNPRO) in Facial Rejuvenation: Prospective, Multicenter Spanish Study.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2026Article
- PLLA and PDLLA Fillers: Linking Crystallinity and Mechanical Stability to Aggregation, Redispersion, and Collagen Formation.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe presented the interim results (6 months) of the trial on the safety and efficacy of poly-L-lactic acid filler (PLLA; Gana V) injection for the correction of nasolabial fold (NLF); however, no long-term follow-up trials through 24 months have been conducted on this topic.
objectiveWe aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Gana V, a new PLLA filler, over 24 months for NLF correction compared with Sculptra, a well-established PLLA filler.
methodsThis double-blind, randomized, non-inferiority, and split-face controlled trial was conducted in France. After the injection of both Gana V and Sculptra on each side of the participants' NLFs, blinded investigators assessed the Wrinkle Severity Rating Scale (WSRS) grade as the primary outcome at each subsequent visit, up to 24 months. The final report on this trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT05215054).
resultsA total of 55 participants with moderate-to-severe NLFs, aged 34 to 70 years (mean age: 53.8 [8.7] years; 87.3% female), were enrolled in the trial. After 24 months, Gana V significantly improved the mean WSRS score (adjusted mean difference [aMD], -0.21; 95% CI, -0.41 to -0.02) in the intention-to-treat analysis, while Sculptra did not show significant improvement (aMD -0.12; 95% CI, -0.28 to 0.05). The outcomes aligned with the 6-month results reported in previous study (aMD, -0.25; 95% CI, -0.49 to -0.01), which supported the sustained efficacy of Gana V over an extended follow-up period. Non-inferiority of Gana V was established as the adjusted mean difference in change between the two treatment groups ranged from -0.25 to 0.10, with the upper bound below the predefined non-inferiority margin of 0.5 (non-inferiority p<0.001). Both treatment groups exhibited similar adverse reaction profiles. Similar results were observed in the per-protocol analysis.
conclusionsThrough the final report of the trial, Gana V was non-inferior to Sculptra with respect to the NLF correction and safety profile. Gana V demonstrated its long-term efficacy through 24 months. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
40897963What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.