Has Anyone Had Their Fillers Done with a Dermasculpt Microcannula?

  • in2aesthetics
  • Miami, FL
  • 2 years ago

They are blunt tipped and flexible so the bruising is decreased. Can anyone tell me their experience with the Dermasculpt micro cannula vs a regular needle?

Comments (7)

I have tried the 3 major USA microcannulas for cosmetic fillers:--Magic Needle, DermaSculpt, and Air-Tite--and I find them MUCH superior to conventional needle methods for injecting fillers with less bruising, less swelling, and less pain. I believe the microcannula will revolutionize our cosmetic filler industry. They are particularly effective most everywhere except in filling scars and where only one or two injections are necessary. My patients are getting 70% to 100% less bruising and swelling and the pain reduction is significant. All these microcannulas are good, but my personal observation is that the Magic Needle is a bit too flexible for accurate distal placement of filler; the DermaSculpt is excellent except that the extrusion point is well below the actual tip so one cannot place filler at the tip of the microcannula and it is harder to glide under the skin; and the Air-Tite SteriGlide MicroCannula has the right rigidity but actually has an extrusion point just about at the tip for precision in placement AND has more of a conical tip instead of a blunt tip for ease of entry. All the microcannulas seem to be far less likely to penetrate blood vessels and cause necrosis because the tip isn't sharp like a conventional needle.

  • Reply
I agree that some cannulas are too flexible to allow precise control during deeper plane injections. After 4 years of using them my personal favorite are cannulas made by Softfil, particularly 30 G and 25 G. On occasion I use TSK's 27 G. Dermasculpt are very good cannulas particularly in more superficial injections. Overall, most of the injectors choose their tools based on their familiarity and comfort. The most important, however, is that after long delay, the cannulas are finding their place in this country.
  • Reply
I've been using cannulas since 2009 and introduced them to my practice in Nashville in 2010. I find cannulas to be amazingly precise and able to deliver any filler to any location. It requires patience and sometimes meticulous manipulations but the results are always worth it. The correction of "hollow eyes" (upper eyelids) require particular approach and the greatest deal of patience but the results could be stunning.
A sharp needle, however, remains useful in particular areas and when only minimal amount of filler is required for fine corrections.
Overall, the greatest advantage of this technique is almost complete elimination of the most devastating complications of filler injections such as vascular compromise.
  • Reply
I like them but find them less accurate than a needle. A needle can go anywhere, a cannula files the path of least resistance. I do like them for lips and tear troughs but many of my patients find them more uncomfortable than needles.
  • Reply

I have switched over to using the DermaSculpt microcannula exclusively for almost all of my filler treatments. It is not only safer to use with less chance of injection into a vessel, but it is more accurate and causes virtually no bruising when done correctly and far less swelling and far less patient discomfort. My favorite areas to use the microcannula are the tear troughs, the lips, temples, and hands. Cheek augmentations and corners of mouth are great too. Once you try it, you won't go back!

  • Reply
I have been using since early 2011. NO Question, there is less bruising, less swelling, and overall greater patient (and doctor) satisfaction. These are great to use for the lips too.
  • Reply
I've been using them for a few weeks. There is definitely a learning curve but definitely a lot less bruising.
  • Reply