4, 16 In 2011, Goodman et al 17 published a prospective, randomized, single blind, split-face study comparing a single administration of Juvéderm® Ultra Plus versus Perlane® in the correction of nasolabial folds over a period of 12 months.
The randomised double-blind split scar study by Chung et al. [ 34] (n = 24) following surgery, with Mederma ® compared with petrolatum emollient found no difference between the two treatments.
Each patient received one coated and one uncoated implant in a double-blind split-mouth design study.
This single-blind split-mouth placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was performed (in 2014, Sari, Iran) on 60 bilateral maxillary canines retracted in 30 orthodontic patients (16 males, 14 females).
The core study had a follow-up period of 36 months and was designed as a randomized, controlled, double-blind, split-mouth multicenter clinical trial.
This study was designed as prospective 5 to 10 years follow-up of a randomized, controlled, double-blind, split-mouth, multi-centre clinical trial that came to its end after 36 months (core study).
The results of this double-blind, split-scalp study found a similar reduction in the number of actinic keratoses with no statistically significant difference found in the efficacy between the two photosensitizers.
18 Juvéderm® Ultra and Juvéderm® Ultra XC were also compared in another double-blind, split-face study as shown in Table 3. Weinkle et al evaluated their safety and effectiveness.
All patients had presented with an edentulous mandible and had received two Straumann Bone Level implants (Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) in the interforaminal region, randomly allocated to one side in a double-blind, split-mouth design.
