The primary objective of this systematic review study was to investigate the effectiveness, durability, and adverse events of PLLA treatment for aesthetic indications. The search strategy was performed in MEDLINE (Ovid). The electronic literature search of five databases was performed, from the inception of the databases until the 12th of February 2024. This was to identify randomized clinical trials that assessed PLLA treatment in adult individuals exhibiting facial aging and/or facial lipoatrophy. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool for Randomized Trials (RoB 2). Eleven RCTs out of 1467 identified citations were included. Four studies showed increased dermal thickness, significant improvement in facial lipoatrophy severity and aesthetic clinical scores, after PLLA treatment with its effects sustained for at least 25 months. Two studies demonstrated the superiority of PLLA over injectable human collagen. Also, three studies showed positive results favoring PLLA when compared with PH gel in lipoatrophy severity, transepidermal water loss, skin quality, elasticity, and patient satisfaction. All adverse events were mild-to-moderate in intensity, and the main ones worth noting were bruising, hematoma, tenderness, nodules, and edema. Five out of eleven studies were considered having high risk of bias. The evidence on the effectiveness and safety of PLLA for facial rejuvenation is of low quality; thus, the reported high effectiveness, safety, and long-lasting effects for this purpose should be further investigated.

Dietary supplementation containing Citrus sinensis extract is being widely used for weight loss due to its anti-adipogenic and antioxidant effects that regulate the metabolism of fatty acids. Bioactive compounds upregulate PPARα in the liver tissue, increasing oxidation of fatty acids and improving insulin sensitivity in addition to decreasing the expression of genes involved in the synthesis of fatty acids, such as LXRα and FAS. Studies on synephrine demonstrated their ability to stimulate the development of beige adipose tissue through greater expression of UCP1 and mtTFA, contributing to an increase in thermogenesis and mitochondrial biogenesis. However, despite its widespread use to reduce abdominal fat, few scientific studies have consensually proven the effectiveness of Moro orange extract for weight loss. This literature review summarizes the current information on the pharmacological and molecular mechanisms involved in the modulation of lipid metabolism by the bioactive compounds present in Moro orange extract.

The primary objective of this systematic review study was to investigate the effectiveness, durability, and adverse events of PLLA treatment for aesthetic indications. The search strategy was performed in MEDLINE (Ovid). The electronic literature search of five databases was performed, from the inception of the databases until 12th of February 2024. This was to identify randomized clinical trials that assessed PLLA treatment in adult individuals exhibiting facial aging and/or facial lipoatrophy. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool for Randomized Trials (RoB 2). Eleven RCTs out of 1467 identified citations were included. Four studies showed increased dermal thickness, significant improvement in facial lipoatrophy severity and aesthetic clinical scores, after PLLA treatment with its effects sustained for at least 25 months. Two studies demonstrated the superiority of PLLA over injectable human collagen. Also, three studies showed positive results favoring PLLA when compared with PH gel in lipoatrophy severity, trans epidermal water loss, skin quality, elasticity, and patient satisfaction. All adverse events were mild-to-moderate in intensity, and the main ones worth noting were bruising, hematoma, tenderness, nodules, and edema. Five out of 11 studies were considered as high risk of bias. The evidence on the effectiveness and safety of PLLA for facial rejuvenation is of low quality; thus, the reported high effectiveness, safety, and long-lasting effects for this purpose, should be further investigated.

Background: Regeneration has emerged as a key concept in aesthetic medicine as the field evolves from predominantly volumetric correction toward biologically oriented strategies aimed at improving tissue quality, function, and long‐term structural integrity. However, the widespread use of the term “regenerative” has often been used without biological precision, leading to conceptual overlap with repair, remodeling, and biostimulation. A critical evaluation of the biological basis and clinical evidence supporting regenerative claims is needed. Objective: To critically synthesize current biological, translational, and clinical evidence related to skin regeneration in aesthetic medicine, with emphasis on extracellular matrix remodeling, immune modulation, mechanotransduction, and dermal–hypodermal integration, and to contextualize the regenerative potential and limitations of commonly used biomaterials. Methods: A narrative review was conducted based on experimental studies, translational research, narrative and systematic reviews, and clinical investigations cited in the reference set. Evidence was qualitatively analyzed focusing on mechanisms of action, tissue‐level interactions, immune responses, extracellular matrix dynamics, involvement of subcutaneous adipose compartments, and durability of clinical outcomes. Results: Cutaneous regeneration is a multilevel functional process driven by coordinated extracellular matrix reorganization, controlled inflammation, mechanotransduction, angiogenesis, and dermal–hypodermal crosstalk. Particulate collagen biostimulators (poly‐ l ‐lactic acid, poly‐ d , l ‐lactic acid, calcium hydroxyapatite, and polycaprolactone) demonstrate the most consistent evidence for sustained functional remodeling, with poly‐ l ‐lactic acid showing the strongest longitudinal and histological support. Hyaluronic acid–based fillers and skinboosters primarily act as microenvironmental modulators with limited regenerative depth. Polydioxanone threads induce localized mechanobiological remodeling that is highly technique dependent. Biological bioregenerators, including polynucleotides, polydeoxyribonucleotides, and extracellular vesicles, show strong mechanistic plausibility but limited and heterogeneous clinical evidence. Conclusion: Regeneration in aesthetic medicine should be defined by biological mechanism, functional integration, and durability rather than by transient morphological change. A biologically accountable and evidence‐based framework is essential for responsible clinical application.

Obesity remains a complex global health issue, necessitating multifaceted treatment approaches. Injectable pharmacotherapies have emerged as effective strategies to manage obesity by targeting metabolic pathways that regulate appetite, energy expenditure, and fat distribution. This review explores the mechanisms, clinical efficacy, and safety profiles of key injectable agents, including GLP-1 and GIP receptor agonists and lipolytic compounds. Additionally, it highlights the aesthetic challenges following significant weight loss, such as skin laxity, and discusses the role of biostimulators and non-invasive technologies in mitigating these effects. Despite the therapeutic promise of injectable agents, their widespread application is hindered by adverse effects, high costs, and accessibility issues. This paper underscores the need for integrative treatment models that combine pharmacological interventions with aesthetic and behavioral therapies to optimize patient outcomes. Future research should focus on refining personalized protocols and expanding the accessibility of these treatments to diverse populations.