Infection in Tear Trough from Restylane

These doctors need to be more open and honest or need to do more follow-up with their patients. I had a similar experience after restalyne injections, 2 years and 3 surgical procedures later, I am still having issues. I told every specialist I saw that I had restalyne injections and they all dismissed me with the same response, "Restalyne is usually very well tolerated and wouldn't cause this type of problem.". All tests and cultures came back negative - they never looked for biofilms which DO NOT show up in blood tests and cultures. I finally went back to the plastic surgeon who performed the injections after my mother saw him and described what I was going through. He said tell her to call me immediately. I went to see him and he said, "Biofilm infection, I'm 99% sure that's what it is; this has to get in the literature.". He said that I am not an isolated case and was shocked that not one of the doctors I saw even mentioned this infection - 2of the specialists were plastic surgeons. We have sent my tissue samples to a lab in NYC and are waiting for the results...I am hopeful that I will, in the least, finally have an answer. I was vain, karma put me in my place.

After developing nodules in the tear troughs months after Restylane injections, my doctor now thinks it might be a biofilm infection, which is caused by highly antibiotic-resistant bacteria. The treatment is six-weeks of two different antibiotics. There seems to be growing awareness in the medical community of the possibility of biofilm infection from the use of fillers such as Restylane and Juvederm: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2890130/ "The role of biofilms in filler-induced adverse reactions has received increasing attention. Many adverse reactions have been reported after the administration of fillers, such as nodules, abscesses, sinuses, delayed reactions, etc. Such reactions, though uncommon, may occur, particularly with long acting fillers. They develop within weeks after the administration of the filler, and present as erythematous, mildly tender nodules. They often persist for months and cause great anxiety to the patient. They are usually culture negative and hence they were previously thought to be due to an allergic or a foreign body reaction to the filler substance. However, supporting data for such an allergic hypothesis have been lacking. These reactions are always small, localized and have no associated antibody formation. Further, many of them resolve with the use of antibiotics. These reactions, particularly those occuring after administration of hydrophillic fillers are now thought to be the consequence of biofilms.[4] Further proof of their infective aetiology has been provided by a recent article which showed that fluorescence in situ hybridization could demonstrate bacteria in seven out of eight biopsies, which were culture negative. Such techniques therefore could be of greater benefit in establishing the infectious cause of such nodules."