2015 / Patient-reported follow-up of a randomized study
What does “up to two years” mean?
How many patients still reported improvement at 24 months?
Source access: publication abstract
The study#
- Design
- Patient-reported follow-up of a randomized study
- Population
- 235 treated patients with midface volume deficit
- Follow-up / endpoint
- 24 months
- Source
- Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 2015 · PMID 25964628
What the authors found#
Patient-rated cheek-volume improvement was 92.8% at six months and 79.0% at two years.[1]
Editorial interpretation
Why it is interesting#
Persistence was measured as perceived improvement, not the physical quantity of filler remaining.
State the anatomical site, endpoint and responder proportion with a duration claim.
What it cannot tell us#
- Patient ratings and extended follow-up are not a two-year blinded comparison.
- The finding applies to the midface protocol, not automatically to chin or temple treatment.
Selection for this library reflects educational interest. It is not a systematic search, formal certainty grade, or complete account of the literature.
Funding & commercial context#
Consult the publication's full text for funding and conflict-of-interest statements; the abstract does not provide a complete disclosure.
Continue with the product
Source & citation#
VOLUMA XC — patient-reported outcomes at two years ↗Checked 2026-09-06 · Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 2015 · PMID 25964628. Cite the original publication when discussing its results; this page is an interpretation.
Aesthetic Pass. What does “up to two years” mean? Product Atlas research interpretation 2026.09.06.1. https://aestheticpass.com/products/studies/voluma-two-year-outcomes/