Injectable Chin Fillers Show High Patient Satisfaction: Systematic Review
Key Takeaways
- A systematic review included 11 studies and 876 patients undergoing injectable volumetric chin augmentation.
- Hyaluronic acid fillers were the predominant injectable, and more than 90% of patients reported satisfaction.
- The authors noted the heterogeneous and mostly noncomparative evidence limited conclusions about long-term outcomes.
A systematic review of nonsurgical chin augmentation found injectable fillers were associated with short-term improvements in chin projection, high patient satisfaction, and predominantly minor, transient adverse effects.
Published in Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, the review by Debraj Shome and colleagues evaluated clinical evidence on injectable volumetric techniques for chin augmentation, with an emphasis on dermal fillers. The investigators searched 7 databases for studies published from 1965 through 2026 and analyzed study quality and heterogeneity. Eleven eligible studies (876 patients total) were included. Hyaluronic acid fillers were the most commonly studied injectable agents.
Hyaluronic Acid Fillers Predominate in Chin Augmentation Studies
Mean follow-up across the included studies was 12.8 months (SD, 7.7 months). More than 90% of patients reported satisfaction following treatment, according to the data, with outcomes supported by photographic and patient-reported assessments. Reported adverse effects were mainly edema, bruising, and nodularity, which the authors characterized as minor and transient.
The findings should be interpreted in the context of limitations in the available evidence. The authors noted that studies were heterogeneous and largely noncomparative, restricting conclusions about longer-term outcomes. The abstract does not provide pooled effect estimates, comparative efficacy data, or detailed rates for individual adverse events.
“Injectable fillers provide effective short-term improvement in chin projection with high patient satisfaction and acceptable safety,” the authors wrote. “However, evidence is heterogeneous and largely non-comparative, limiting conclusions on long-term outcomes. Further controlled studies are required.”