← Radiesse

Radiesse for Marionette Lines

Written & medically reviewed by the Dermapedia team
At a Glance

Radiesse is not approved for marionette lines by name — but the wording of its main US approval may cover them. The 2006 approval is for "subdermal implantation for the correction of moderate to severe facial wrinkles and folds, such as nasolabial folds." Nasolabial folds are given there as an example, not as a limit.

That makes marionette lines a question of reading the label rather than a clear-cut off-label use. Whether a particular treatment falls inside that sentence is a labelling interpretation, and the FDA approval documents do not settle it. What they do settle is the evidence: every trial the FDA reviewed for that indication was run in nasolabial folds. No trial has tested Radiesse in marionette lines — the only published measurement of them comes from a retrospective chart review of 22 patients.

Off-label injecting is legal and routine. Doctors use approved products outside their named indications across all of medicine. It is worth knowing when it is happening, because it tells you the published evidence for your exact area may be thin or absent — not that anyone is doing anything improper.

Radiesse cannot be dissolved. Hyaluronidase, the enzyme that breaks down hyaluronic acid fillers, has no effect on it. There is no approved reversal agent for calcium hydroxylapatite. In the lower face, where the result sits in a visible, mobile area for months and the label makes no duration claim at all, that is the single most important thing to weigh before agreeing to it.

Named approved areas for Radiesse in the US are nasolabial folds and other facial wrinkles and folds, HIV-associated facial fat loss, the backs of the hands, the jawline and the décolleté. Marionette lines are not on that list as a named area, and neither is any other named lower-face landmark.

Key Facts

ProductRadiesse, calcium hydroxylapatite (CaHA) microspheres in a gel carrier, made by Merz
Main US approvalPMA P050052, 22 December 2006, for correction of moderate to severe facial wrinkles and folds, such as nasolabial folds
Marionette linesNot named in any Radiesse approval; the general wrinkles-and-folds wording may cover them, and that is a labelling question
Trial evidence in marionette linesNone; the pivotal trial for this indication was run in nasolabial folds
Nasolabial fold pivotal resultAt 6 months, 78.6% of Radiesse-treated folds scored at least 1 point better than the collagen-treated fold in the same face
Longest follow-up102 of 117 subjects followed up to 39 months; 40% of folds were graded improved or better at 30 months or more
Nodule rate in that trial0.9%, 1 of 117, the same as the control side
ReversibleNo. Hyaluronidase does not affect calcium hydroxylapatite and no reversal agent is approved
Other named approved areasHIV-associated facial fat loss (2006), backs of the hands (2015), jawline contour (2021), décolleté at 1:2 dilution (2026)
Label safety windowSafety beyond 3 years in the face has not been investigated
Where Radiesse is not establishedThe lips, where the label says safety and effectiveness have not been established

What Radiesse is approved for, and when

Radiesse is calcium hydroxylapatite, or CaHA — microspheres of a calcium-and-phosphate mineral, 25 to 45 microns across, suspended in a gel carrier. The gel provides volume on the day and is absorbed over the following months; the microspheres stay behind and prompt the body to build its own collagen around them.

Fillers like this are Class III devices, approved through the FDA's premarket approval route. That route required clinical evidence for a specific cosmetic indication in a specific area, which is why filler approvals are written area by area.

Radiesse's US record is:

22 December 2006, PMA P050052: "Subdermal implantation for the correction of moderate to severe facial wrinkles and folds, such as nasolabial folds."

22 December 2006, PMA P050037: Restoration or correction of the signs of facial fat loss in people with HIV.

4 June 2015, supplement S049: "hand augmentation to correct volume loss in the dorsum of the hands."

1 September 2021, supplement S129: Jawline contour, for Radiesse (+) Lidocaine.

31 March 2026, supplement S162: Correction of décolleté wrinkles, at a 1:2 dilution with saline.

Marionette lines are not named in any of them: Nor is any other named landmark of the lower face other than the jawline.

Where marionette lines sit in that wording

This is the part most pages get wrong in one direction or the other.

The 2006 indication is not written as a list of permitted lines. It says "moderate to severe facial wrinkles and folds, such as nasolabial folds." That parenthetical is an example, not a boundary. Marionette lines — the creases running down from the corners of the mouth toward the chin — are facial folds, and they plausibly sit inside the literal sentence.

So the honest answer is not "this is off-label" and not "this is approved". It is this: whether a given marionette treatment falls inside the approved wording is a matter of interpreting the label, and the FDA approval documents do not resolve it. What is not open to interpretation is the evidence behind the wording.

Every trial the FDA reviewed for that indication was run in nasolabial folds: The regulator saw nasolabial fold data and approved wording broad enough to reach beyond it. That is normal, and it is also the reason a reader asking specifically about marionette lines will not find a trial answering their question.

Off-label use of approved products is legal and routine across medicine. Flagging it is not an accusation. It simply tells you which claims have trial data behind them and which do not.

What the evidence actually covers

The pivotal trial: The study behind the 2006 approval was split-face: 117 subjects, each with Radiesse in one nasolabial fold and a collagen filler in the other, ages 31 to 76. It met its non-inferiority endpoint on the Lemperle Rating Scale at 3 months. At 6 months, 78.6% of the Radiesse-treated folds scored at least 1 point better than the control fold in the same face. The population was 89.7% female and 87.2% white.

The long-term extension: Bass and colleagues followed 102 of those 117 subjects for up to 39 months after their last Radiesse injection. 40% of folds assessed at 30 months or more were graded "improved" or better. The authors themselves noted the improvement was "substantially less at this later time point." Read it carefully: 40% still improved at 30 months is not the same as "lasts 30 months," and 60% were not. No nodules, granulomas or infections were reported in those 102 people over three years.

The only published work that measured marionette lines directly used hyperdilute Radiesse across the mid and lower face and found reduced marionette-line depth on 3D imaging at day 150 (p=0.0019) in 22 charts - a retrospective review with no control group, graded Level of Evidence 4 by its own authors, from an author group with Merz ties, at a dilution that is not part of any approved labelling. It is a signal, not a result.

Radiesse cannot be dissolved

This is the fact that changes the calculation in the lower face.

Hyaluronic acid fillers — Juvederm, Restylane, Belotero, Versa, RHA — can be broken down with hyaluronidase, an enzyme that cleaves hyaluronic acid. Hyaluronidase has no target in calcium hydroxylapatite. It does nothing to the mineral microspheres and nothing to the carboxymethylcellulose gel they sit in. There is no approved reversal agent for Radiesse, and the current label mentions none. A 2026 review of CaHA named the absence of a reversal agent as a known limitation of the material.

Sodium thiosulfate is sometimes discussed online as an antidote. It is not an established reversal agent for Radiesse - the published evidence is contested and is set out in full on the page about whether Radiesse is permanent.

What is realistically available if the result is wrong: waiting for the material to degrade, saline infiltration with mechanical disruption through a cannula for nodules, intralesional steroids for inflammatory lumps, and rarely excision. The label states that safety beyond 3 years in the face has not been investigated — that is a study window, not a duration claim.

Risks specific to this part of the face

Every filler carries a risk of vascular occlusion: Material entering or compressing an artery, cutting off blood supply. It is rare and it is a medical emergency. The nasolabial and perioral territory is supplied by the angular artery, which connects onward to the circulation that feeds the eye, so both skin death and vision loss have been reported after injection in this region.

A review of a century of published filler blindness cases found 511 cases, of which 365 were reported between 2018 and 2023. In those 365, the material was hyaluronic acid in 79.6% of cases and calcium hydroxylapatite in 1.6%. Of 318 cases with a recorded outcome, 6.0% recovered completely, 25.8% improved partly, and 68.2% did not recover. Those are counts of published cases with no denominator, so they cannot be turned into a personal risk figure — but they establish that the outcome is usually permanent.

Two further points that get skipped. In a survey of 52 experienced injector-trainers, 62% reported having had at least one intravascular injection, and pain was mild or absent in 47% of those events. Pain is not a reliable alarm.

Lumps are the other area-specific issue. In the nasolabial pivotal trial the nodule rate was 0.9%, one patient, the same as the control side. But a consensus review of CaHA advises avoiding highly mobile areas and thin-skinned, unforgiving areas because nodules are more common there, and the Radiesse label states plainly that safety and effectiveness in the lips have not been established, with published reports of nodules there. The marionette region sits close to that mobile perioral territory.

Questions worth asking at a consultation:

Are my marionette lines mostly a fold, or mostly loss of volume higher in the face?

Why Radiesse here rather than a hyaluronic acid filler that could be dissolved?

What dilution are you using, and is that dilution part of the approved labelling?

What is the plan if I dislike the result at three months?

Do you stock the drugs and have the referral pathway for a vascular emergency?

Get emergency help now

Go to an emergency department or call 911 for any of these, during or after the appointment. These can indicate that filler has entered a blood vessel, and time matters in hours.

Any change in vision — blurring, a dark patch, double vision or loss of sight in either eye

Sudden severe pain, or pain out of proportion to the procedure

Skin turning white or pale (blanching), then dusky, purple or mottled

Weakness, drooping, slurred speech or any other stroke-like symptom

Call your injector if

Swelling keeps growing after the first few days instead of settling

A lump appears and does not settle, or a lump appears weeks or months later

Redness spreads outward from the injection site, or the area becomes warm and tender

Tenderness, firmness or swelling appears weeks after treatment, which can indicate a delayed inflammatory reaction or infection

The correction looks like it has shifted position

Questions people ask

+
Is Radiesse FDA-approved for marionette lines?Not by name. Its approval covers "moderate to severe facial wrinkles and folds, such as nasolabial folds." That sentence gives nasolabial folds as an example rather than as a limit, so marionette lines may fall inside it — but the FDA documents do not settle the point, and no trial of Radiesse in marionette lines exists.
Is it legal for a clinic to inject it there?Yes. Using an approved product outside its named indication is legal and routine throughout medicine. The reason to know about it is that it tells you what has and has not been tested, not that anything improper is happening.
Can Radiesse be dissolved if I do not like it?No. Hyaluronidase breaks down hyaluronic acid fillers and has no effect on calcium hydroxylapatite. No reversal agent is approved for Radiesse. The realistic options are waiting for it to degrade, saline injections with mechanical disruption for nodules, steroids for inflammatory lumps, and rarely surgery.
How long does it last in the lower face?There is no duration figure on the label, and it makes no permanence claim. In the nasolabial fold trial, 78.6% of treated folds were still at least a point better than the control fold at 6 months. In the extension study, 40% of folds were graded improved or better at 30 months or more — which is not the same as saying it lasts 30 months.
Would a hyaluronic acid filler be a better choice here?That is a conversation for a consultation, but the practical difference is clear. Hyaluronic acid products approved for "moderate to severe facial wrinkles and folds (such as nasolabial folds)" carry the same broad wording and can be broken down with hyaluronidase if something goes wrong. Radiesse cannot. No head-to-head trial in marionette lines exists to say which produces the better result.
What is hyperdilute Radiesse, and is it approved?Hyperdilution means mixing Radiesse with extra saline or lidocaine so it spreads further and acts more on skin quality than on volume. The only dilution with an FDA approval is 1:2, and only for the décolleté. Facial use at 1:3 or 1:4 is outside the approved labelling.
How common are lumps?In the nasolabial fold pivotal trial, one patient of 117 — 0.9% — had a nodule, the same rate as the control side, and the three-year extension in 102 patients reported none. The label separately notes that safety in the lips has not been established and that nodules have been reported there, and consensus reviews advise caution in very mobile, thin-skinned areas.
What is the most serious thing that can go wrong?Filler entering an artery. That can cause skin death or, if the material reaches the circulation supplying the eye, vision loss. It is rare, it is an emergency, and with Radiesse there is no enzyme that can be given to break the material down.

References

+
US Food and Drug Administration. Summary of Safety and Effectiveness Data, PMA P050052, RADIESSE Injectable Implant, approved 22 December 2006. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf5/p050052b.pdf
The original indication wording — "correction of moderate to severe facial wrinkles and folds, such as nasolabial folds" — and the split-face pivotal trial in 117 subjects with the 3-month and 6-month results.
US Food and Drug Administration. Summary of Safety and Effectiveness Data, PMA P050037, RADIESSE, approved 22 December 2006. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf5/p050037b.pdf
The separate approval covering facial fat loss in people with HIV.
US Food and Drug Administration. PMA P050052/S049 approval letter, hand augmentation, 4 June 2015. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf5/P050052S049a.pdf
The verbatim hand indication, one of the named areas Radiesse does carry.
US Food and Drug Administration. Summary of Safety and Effectiveness Data, PMA P050052/S129, RADIESSE (+) Lidocaine, jawline contour, approved 1 September 2021. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf5/P050052S129B.pdf
The jawline indication wording, the closest named lower-face area to the marionette region.
US Food and Drug Administration. Labelling, PMA P050052/S162D, RADIESSE Injectable Implant. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf5/P050052S162D.pdf
The current combined indications block, the statement that safety beyond 3 years in the face has not been investigated, and the statement that safety and effectiveness in the lips have not been established.
Bass LS, Smith S, Busso M, McClaren M. Calcium hydroxylapatite (Radiesse) for treatment of nasolabial folds: long-term safety and efficacy results. Aesthet Surg J. 2010;30(2):235-8. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20442101/
Extension of the pivotal study: 102 of 117 subjects followed up to 39 months, 40% of folds graded improved or better at 30 months or more, with the authors noting improvement was substantially less at that point. Post-approval extension of a manufacturer-sponsored premarket study.
Durairaj KK, et al. Hyperdilute calcium hydroxylapatite for the mid and lower face. Aesthet Surg J Open Forum. 2025;7:ojaf104. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41376672/
Retrospective chart review, 22 patients, two sessions of 1:3 hyperdilute CaHA; 3D imaging at day 150 showed reduced marionette-line depth (p=0.0019), nasolabial fold depth and jowl volume. No control group, Level of Evidence 4, author group with Merz ties.
Huang, Ma, Guo. Calcium hydroxylapatite in aesthetic and regenerative medicine. Tissue Eng Part B Rev. 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42175763/
Review of CaHA mechanism through 2025, and the source for the absence of a reversal agent being named as a limitation of the material.
Danysz W, Nowag B, Hengl T, Kreymerman P, Furne C, Madeuf E, Höennscheidt C, Mraz Robinson D. Can sodium thiosulfate act as a reversal agent for calcium hydroxylapatite filler? Results of a preclinical study. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2020;13:1059-73. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33408497/
In vitro and live-pig study finding no CaHA degradation by sodium thiosulfate, with necrosis and haemorrhage observed after treatment. The authors are Merz R&D and Merz North America staff — the manufacturer of the product being tested.
Emer J, Sundaram H. Aesthetic applications of calcium hydroxylapatite volumizing filler: an evidence-based review and discussion of current concepts. J Drugs Dermatol. 2013;12(12):1345-54. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24301235/
Evidence and consensus review describing immediate volume replacement for up to 12 months, advising against use in highly mobile and anatomically unforgiving areas because of nodules, and stating that CaHA is adjustable but not reversible while HA is fully reversible with hyaluronidase.
Doyon VC, Liu C, Fitzgerald R, et al. Update on blindness from filler: review of prognostic factors, management approaches, and a century of published cases. Aesthet Surg J. 2024;44(10):1091-1104. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38630871/
511 published cases since 1906. In the 365 newer cases the material was HA in 79.6% and calcium hydroxylapatite in 1.6%; of 318 cases with a recorded outcome, 6.0% recovered fully and 68.2% did not recover. A literature case-count with no denominator, so it cannot give a rate.
Goodman GJ, Roberts S, Callan P. Experience and management of intravascular injection with facial fillers: results of a multinational survey of experienced injectors. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2016;40:549-55. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27286849/
Survey of 52 injector-trainers across 16 countries: 62% reported at least one intravascular injection, and pain was mild or absent in 47% of events. Self-selecting survey with heavy recall bias and no denominator.
US Food and Drug Administration. Dermal fillers (soft tissue fillers). https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/aesthetic-cosmetic-devices/dermal-fillers-soft-tissue-fillers
FDA's risk list, including the statement that side effects may appear weeks, months or years after injection.
← Back to Radiesse