Whether polynucleotides are 'better' than traditional dermal fillers depends entirely on the clinical objective. Traditional dermal fillers, typically composed of cross-linked hyaluronic acid (HA), are designed to provide immediate structural volumisation and 'fill' deep wrinkles or hollows by physically occupying space [1]. In contrast, polynucleotides function as bio-stimulators; they do not provide instant volume but instead work at a cellular level to repair damaged tissue, stimulate fibroblasts, and increase endogenous collagen and elastin production over several months [2].
For an Australian patient seeking to restore lost cheek volume or augment lip shape, traditional fillers remain the gold standard due to their lifting capacity. However, for patients focused on improving skin quality, reducing fine lines, and treating the delicate periorbital area without the risk of 'puffiness' or Tyndall effect, polynucleotides are often superior [3]. Ultimately, they are synergistic rather than mutually exclusive; polynucleotides improve the biological 'canvas' of the skin, while fillers address structural deficits [1][2].
Polynucleotides (PN) are biological molecules derived from salmon DNA, purified and suspended in a water-based gel. Unlike hyaluronic acid fillers which primarily hydrate and volumise, PN fragments bind to A2A adenosine receptors on the surface of fibroblasts. This binding triggers a cascade of wound-healing responses, promoting the proliferation of healthy cells and the synthesis of Type I collagen [2][4].
From a rheological perspective, traditional fillers have a higher G' (elastic modulus), allowing them to resist mechanical deformation and support overlying tissue. Polynucleotides have a lower viscosity and are non-cross-linked, meaning they integrate seamlessly into the dermis to enhance cellular turnover and metabolic activity without altering facial contours unnaturally [3][5].
For those interested in the cellular repair and regenerative focus of polynucleotides, our Cellular Thread was formulated with a specialised peptide complex to support skin longevity and firmness from within. To further complement a regime focused on structural integrity and deep hydration, many find that layering with Cellular Crème helps to seal the skin barrier while promoting a supple, youth-preserved complexion.
FAQ
Are polynucleotides safer than HA fillers?
Polynucleotides generally carry a lower risk of vascular occlusion, a rare but serious complication of traditional dermal fillers where the gel blocks a blood vessel [1]. Because polynucleotides are highly biocompatible and have a fluid-like consistency, they do not exert the same compressive force on vessels. However, as they are derived from salmon DNA, they are contraindicated for individuals with severe fish allergies [4].
How long do the results of polynucleotides last compared to fillers?
Traditional fillers typically last between 6 to 18 months depending on the cross-linking technology and area of injection [1]. Polynucleotides require an initial course of 2-4 treatments spaced several weeks apart, with results appearing gradually as collagen is synthesised. Once the regenerative effect is achieved, results typically persist for 6 to 9 months, though the improved skin quality can have longer-lasting biological benefits [3][5].
Can I have polynucleotides and fillers at the same time?
Yes, combining these treatments is increasingly common in Australian aesthetic clinics. Polynucleotides can be used to prime the skin and improve the health of the extracellular matrix, which may actually help traditional fillers sit more naturally and last longer within the tissue [2]. It is often recommended to wait 2-4 weeks between different types of injectable treatments to monitor the inflammatory response [4].
References:
[1] Goldie K, et al. Global Aesthetics Consensus: Avoidance and Management of Complications from Hyaluronic Acid Fillers. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2020;145(6):1045e-1058e.
[2] Colangelo MT, et al. Polynucleotide-based bio-stimulators in dermatology: Mechanisms of action and clinical applications. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021;20(11):3421-3430.
[3] Massidda O, et al. Long-chain polynucleotides versus hyaluronic acid in the treatment of periorbital rejuvenation. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2022;46(4):1850-1859.
[4] Cavallini M, et al. Consensus report on the use of PN-HPT (Polynucleotides Highly Purified Technology) in aesthetic medicine. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021;20(3):922-928.
[5] Palmieri A, et al. DNA fragments and polymers in the treatment of skin ageing: A review of the evidence. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(2):1142.
Medical Disclaimer: This article is for educational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional before starting any new skincare regimen. Content reviewed by a biomedical scientist.
