Botox vs. Dysport – which one is better?
Posted on September 28, 2010With the availability of two great wrinkle-fighting products in Botox and Dysport, the inevitable question of “which one is better?” comes up.
Here’s one study, from the recent Facial Plastic Surgery meeting in Boston, that suggests Dysport works better on “crow’s feet” than Botox (link here). I think, though, there may be a problem with the study….read on.
Here’s what was done: 10 units of Botox Cosmetic were used to treat crow’s feet on one side of the face, while 30 units of Dysport were used on the other side. Investigator and subject gradings of the appearance of the crow’s feet wrinkles were obtained using a standardized grading scale before the injections and then two, four, six, and 30 days post injection. Sounds good so far, right?
Unless you have insider knowledge of this topic, most people would accept the findings at face value. (pardon the pun) However, there’s a catch. The doses of Botox and Dysport are not necessarily equal in this study. Most people use a 2.5:1 conversion ratio, when converting from Botox units to Dysport units, since the two medicines are not interchangable. And even that number is a bit of a guess- it might easily be 2.6:1 to 2.7:1.
In this study, using the 2.5:1 conversion ratio would mean that the Dysport dose should have been only 25 units, rather than the 30 units that were actually given. So, it seems like the Dysport side of the face got a slightly stronger dose – and a higher dose is naturally going to be more effective.
In my experience, I think that the Dysport product certainly has a slightly quicker onset of wrinkle reduction. But I can’t say that I’ve seen it work that much better, and get rid of more wrinkles than Botox does at the same dosage. It’s a bit like Coke vs. Pepsi, if you ask me.
Bottom line: too early to tell which wrinkle-fighting agent will win the battle here. I would suggest that they repeat this study with more equivalent dosings.
Here’s what was done: 10 units of Botox Cosmetic were used to treat crow’s feet on one side of the face, while 30 units of Dysport were used on the other side. Investigator and subject gradings of the appearance of the crow’s feet wrinkles were obtained using a standardized grading scale before the injections and then two, four, six, and 30 days post injection. Sounds good so far, right?
Unless you have insider knowledge of this topic, most people would accept the findings at face value. (pardon the pun) However, there’s a catch. The doses of Botox and Dysport are not necessarily equal in this study. Most people use a 2.5:1 conversion ratio, when converting from Botox units to Dysport units, since the two medicines are not interchangable. And even that number is a bit of a guess- it might easily be 2.6:1 to 2.7:1.
In this study, using the 2.5:1 conversion ratio would mean that the Dysport dose should have been only 25 units, rather than the 30 units that were actually given. So, it seems like the Dysport side of the face got a slightly stronger dose – and a higher dose is naturally going to be more effective.
In my experience, I think that the Dysport product certainly has a slightly quicker onset of wrinkle reduction. But I can’t say that I’ve seen it work that much better, and get rid of more wrinkles than Botox does at the same dosage. It’s a bit like Coke vs. Pepsi, if you ask me.
Bottom line: too early to tell which wrinkle-fighting agent will win the battle here. I would suggest that they repeat this study with more equivalent dosings.