← Radiesse

Radiesse Temples

Written & medically reviewed by the Dermapedia team
At a Glance

Radiesse is not FDA-approved for the temples. Its named approved areas are facial wrinkles and folds such as nasolabial folds, HIV-associated facial lipoatrophy, the backs of the hands, the jawline, and the décolleté. The temple is not among them. Injecting it there is off-label. Off-label use is legal and done routinely. It does mean no regulator has reviewed evidence for this product in this area.

Other fillers do hold a US temple indication. The temple is not an unapproved area in general. Juvederm Voluma XC was approved for temple hollowing on 6 October 2023. The FDA required a device-specific training programme before injectors could use it there. Restylane Contour was approved for temple hollowing on 20 March 2026. Both are hyaluronic acid products. That means both can be broken down with hyaluronidase.

The temple is a recognised high-risk area. It carries the superficial temporal artery, the middle temporal vein and the deep temporal arteries. Those vessels connect toward the orbit. That is the route by which filler can reach the eye. The temple also contains a broad gliding plane, so product placed there can travel.

The published evidence for filling temples with calcium hydroxylapatite is thin. A 2025 systematic review of non-surgical temple volumisation covered 40 articles and 881 patients. Of those patients, 783 received hyaluronic acid and 93 received calcium hydroxylapatite. Its first author discloses consultancy for AbbVie, Galderma and Merz.

And Radiesse cannot be dissolved. In an area this close to the orbital circulation, that is the single most useful thing to know before deciding.

Key Facts

Radiesse FDA approval for the templesNone
Radiesse named approved areasFacial wrinkles and folds such as nasolabial folds, and HIV facial lipoatrophy (2006); dorsum of the hands (2015); jawline contour (2021); décolleté at 1:2 dilution (2026)
Status of temple injection with RadiesseOff-label — legal and routine, but not reviewed by the FDA for this area
Fillers that do hold a US temple indicationJuvéderm Voluma XC (6 October 2023) and Restylane Contour (20 March 2026)
Unusual condition on the Voluma XC temple approvalFDA required a device-specific injector training programme
Voluma XC temple trial171 randomised 2:1, evaluator-blinded, no-treatment control; 80.4% responders at month 3 versus 13.5%; 73.3% still responding at 13 months
Restylane Contour temple trial225 enrolled, evaluator-blinded, no-treatment control; 91.2% responders at month 3 versus 9.1%; follow-up scheduled to 18 months
Vessels in the templeSuperficial temporal artery, middle temporal vein, deep temporal arteries, with connections toward the orbit
Published temple filler review40 articles, 881 patients — 783 hyaluronic acid, 93 calcium hydroxylapatite, 28 PMMA, 10 allograft adipose matrix, 2 poly-L-lactic acid
Most reported side effects in that reviewPain, tenderness or pressure 29.6%; ecchymosis (bruising) 17.3%; oedema (swelling) 15.5%
ReversibilityHyaluronic acid fillers can be broken down with hyaluronidase; Radiesse cannot
Approved reversal agent for RadiesseNone

What Radiesse is approved for, and what it is not

Radiesse came to market through the FDA's premarket approval route. That route required clinical evidence for a named cosmetic use in a named area. It makes the approved list unusually specific:

Moderate to severe facial wrinkles and folds, "such as nasolabial folds", and facial fat loss (lipoatrophy) in people with HIV: Both were approved 22 December 2006.

Hand augmentation to correct volume loss in the dorsum of the hands: Approved 4 June 2015.

Moderate to severe loss of jawline contour in adults over 21, for Radiesse (+) Lidocaine. Approved 1 September 2021.

Correction of decollete wrinkles in patients 22 and older, at a 1:2 dilution with saline. Approved 31 March 2026.

The temple is not on that list, and no Radiesse supplement names it.

Radiesse is calcium hydroxylapatite microspheres in a gel carrier. The gel gives immediate volume. The microspheres left behind prompt the body to build collagen around them over the following months.

Two fillers do hold a US temple indication — and Radiesse is not one of them

This is the correction worth making. A lot of writing on this topic says no filler is approved for the temples. That has not been true since 2023.

Juvéderm Voluma XC, approved for the temple on 6 October 2023: The indication reads, in part, "for supraperiosteal injection to augment the temple region to improve moderate to severe temple hollowing in adults over the age of 21." Its trial randomised 171 people 2:1 against a no-treatment control, with blinded evaluators. It reported 80.4% responders at month 3 versus 13.5%, and 73.3% still responding at 13 months. Unusually, the FDA also required a device-specific injector training programme for this indication. That programme was approved separately in 2024 and updated in 2025. It is a real restriction. The temple indication is not open to any injector who has not completed the training.

Restylane Contour, approved for the temple on 20 March 2026: "Restylane Contour is indicated for correction of temple hollowing in patients over the age of 21." Its trial enrolled 225 people against a no-treatment control, with blinded evaluators. It reported 91.2% responders at month 3 versus 9.1%. Follow-up was scheduled to 18 months.

Do not read those two responder rates as a ranking: They come from separate trials, using different manufacturer-developed scales, in different populations. Nothing in either trial compares one product with the other. A number from one cannot be set against a number from the other.

Both are hyaluronic acid fillers. That matters in this area specifically, because hyaluronic acid can be broken down with hyaluronidase and Radiesse cannot.

Why the temple is anatomically high-risk

Two separate problems, and they are worth separating.

Blood vessels: The temple carries the superficial temporal artery, the middle temporal vein and the deep temporal arteries, and its vessels connect toward the orbit. That connection is the route by which filler injected under pressure can travel backwards along an artery and then forwards into the vessels supplying the retina. The volume needed is very small: in one review, the amount required to fill the supratrochlear artery from the glabella to its bifurcation averaged 0.085 mL — less than a tenth of a standard syringe.

The gliding plane: The temple contains a broad plane where tissue slides, and product placed there can travel away from where it was put. A 2026 case report describes a woman with persistent swelling of both upper eyelids whose MRI and thyroid workup were unremarkable; surgery eventually found deposits consistent with hyaluronic acid in the eyelid skin, and she then recalled temple filler two years earlier. The authors attributed it to migration through the avascular gliding planes of the temple.

There is one more signal worth reporting, with a caution attached. A systematic review of complications from facial fat grafting collected 58 complications in 38 published patients; most followed injection to the forehead or the temporal region, and 53% of all severe complications occurred in the temporal region. Two caveats have to travel with that figure: it is a count of published case reports with no denominator, so it says what goes wrong and where but not how often, and it is about autologous fat, not about Radiesse. It is evidence that the region is unforgiving, not evidence about this product.

What has actually been published on filler in the temple

A 2025 systematic review of non-surgical temple volumisation is the best available summary: It covered 40 articles and 881 patients. The materials used break down as hyaluronic acid 783 patients, calcium hydroxylapatite 93, PMMA 28, allograft adipose matrix 10 and poly-L-lactic acid 2. The most common reported side effects were pain, tenderness or pressure in 29.6%, ecchymosis - bruising - in 17.3%, and oedema, or swelling, in 15.5%.

Two things follow from those numbers. First, the temple literature is overwhelmingly a hyaluronic acid literature; calcium hydroxylapatite is a small minority of it. Second, the review's first author discloses consultancy or research relationships with AbbVie, Galderma and Merz — the manufacturers of the products it reviews. That does not invalidate the count, but it belongs beside it.

No randomised trial of Radiesse specifically in the temple appears in the published record: The continuing-education literature on hyperdiluting Radiesse does describe using it undiluted for deep structural support in areas including the temple — but that is case-series-level material from a Merz-linked faculty group, describing a convention rather than a tested protocol.

What off-label actually means here

Off-label use is legal and routine: Doctors across medicine use approved products outside their approved indications every day, and injecting Radiesse in the temple is a normal, non-scandalous example of that. Nobody is breaking a rule.

What it changes is the evidence you are relying on. For the hands, jawline, décolleté and nasolabial folds, a regulator reviewed a clinical trial of this product in that area. For the temple, there is no such review for Radiesse — the case for it rests on anatomy, technique and case series.

And the reversibility point lands harder here than almost anywhere else on the face. If a hyaluronic acid product in the temple migrates, forms a lump or blocks a vessel, hyaluronidase is an option. With Radiesse it is not, and there is no approved reversal agent for calcium hydroxylapatite.

Questions worth asking at a consultation:

Which product are you proposing for my temples, and is the temple an approved indication for it?

If it is not, what has been published for this product in this area?

Needle or cannula, and at what depth and plane?

If something goes wrong, what can be done — and can this specific product be dissolved?

What is your plan and equipment for a suspected vascular occlusion, and where is the nearest ophthalmology cover?

Get emergency help now

Go to an emergency department or call 911 if, during or after any filler injection, you have:

Sudden vision change, double vision or loss of vision in either eye

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

Skin that turns white (blanching) and then dusky, mottled or net-like

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

These can be signs that filler has entered an artery. Time matters in hours. Published guidance treats suspected retinal artery occlusion as a same-hour emergency and suspected skin occlusion as a same-day emergency, though that window comes from a 1980 primate experiment and from expert consensus, not from trials in filler patients.

Do not wait to see whether it settles, and do not use pain as your gate. In a survey of 52 experienced injectors worldwide, pain was mild or absent in 47% of the intravascular injections they reported.

Radiesse raises the stakes here: Hyaluronic acid fillers can be broken down with hyaluronidase in an emergency. Calcium hydroxylapatite cannot, and there is no approved reversal agent for it, so the response is supportive care rather than dissolving the product.

Call your injector if

Swelling keeps growing after the first few days instead of settling

A lump appears and does not settle

Redness spreads outward from the injection site

Tenderness, redness or a firm lump turns up weeks or months later — a delayed inflammatory reaction or an infection is possible

The product looks as though it has moved from where it was placed

None of these is an emergency in the same sense as the list above, but all of them are reasons to be seen rather than to wait it out.

Questions people ask

+
Is Radiesse FDA-approved for the temples?No. Its named approved areas are facial wrinkles and folds such as nasolabial folds, HIV facial lipoatrophy, the dorsum of the hands, the jawline and the décolleté. Temple use is off-label.
So no filler is approved for the temples?That is not correct. Juvéderm Voluma XC was approved for temple hollowing on 6 October 2023 and Restylane Contour on 20 March 2026. Both are hyaluronic acid fillers.
Why did the FDA require special training for the Voluma XC temple indication?The temple approval carries a device-specific injector training programme, approved separately in 2024 and updated in 2025. It is an unusual condition and it means the indication is not open to any injector who has not completed that training.
Is it illegal for a clinic to use Radiesse in my temples?No. Off-label use of an approved product is legal and routine throughout medicine. It does mean there is no FDA-reviewed trial of this product in this area, so ask what evidence the recommendation is based on.
Why is the temple considered risky?It carries the superficial temporal artery, the middle temporal vein and the deep temporal arteries, with connections toward the orbit — the pathway by which filler can reach the vessels supplying the eye. It also has a broad gliding plane, so product can travel from where it was placed. One case report documents upper-eyelid swelling appearing two years after temple filler.
What does the published evidence show for filling temples?A 2025 systematic review covered 40 articles and 881 patients, of whom 783 had hyaluronic acid and 93 had calcium hydroxylapatite. Reported side effects were most often pain or tenderness (29.6%), ecchymosis or bruising (17.3%) and oedema or swelling (15.5%). Its first author discloses consultancy for AbbVie, Galderma and Merz.
If I have Radiesse in my temples and I do not like the result, can it be removed?Not by dissolving it. Hyaluronidase has no effect on calcium hydroxylapatite and there is no approved reversal agent. The documented options are time, saline injection with mechanical disruption, steroid injection for inflammatory lumps, and rarely surgery.
Should I choose a hyaluronic acid filler for my temples instead?That is a decision for you and a clinician, and it depends on what you are trying to change. The factual difference worth taking into the conversation is that two hyaluronic acid products hold a temple indication with published trial data in that area, and that hyaluronic acid can be dissolved while Radiesse cannot.

References

+
US Food and Drug Administration. RADIESSE injectable implant labelling, P050052/S162D. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf5/P050052S162D.pdf
The combined indications block for Radiesse. No temple indication appears in it.
US Food and Drug Administration. PMA P050052, RADIESSE, Summary of Safety and Effectiveness Data, approved 22 December 2006. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf5/p050052b.pdf
The original approval for moderate to severe facial wrinkles and folds, such as nasolabial folds.
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.
US Food and Drug Administration. PMA P050052/S129, RADIESSE (+) Lidocaine, jawline contour, approved 1 September 2021. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf5/P050052S129B.pdf
The verbatim jawline indication.
US Food and Drug Administration. PMA P050052/S162, décolleté wrinkles at 1:2 dilution, approved 31 March 2026. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf5/P050052S162B.pdf
The verbatim décolleté indication and the only approved dilution of the product.
US Food and Drug Administration. PMA P110033/S070, JUVÉDERM VOLUMA XC, temple region, approved 6 October 2023. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf11/P110033S070B.pdf
The temple indication wording and the pivotal trial: 171 randomised 2:1, evaluator-blinded, no-treatment control, 80.4% responders at month 3 versus 13.5%, 73.3% still responding at 13 months. Related supplements S079 (2024) and S098 (2025) approve the required device-specific injector training programme.
US Food and Drug Administration. PMA P140029/S054, Restylane Contour, temple hollowing, approved 20 March 2026. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpma/pma.cfm?id=P140029S054
The temple indication wording and the pivotal trial: 225 enrolled, evaluator-blinded, no-treatment control, 91.2% responders at month 3 versus 9.1%, follow-up scheduled to 18 months.
Friedmann DP, et al. Non-surgical temple volumization: a systematic review. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2025;49(19):5237-51. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40325223/
40 articles, 881 patients: hyaluronic acid 783, calcium hydroxylapatite 93, PMMA 28, allograft adipose matrix 10, poly-L-lactic acid 2. Most common adverse events pain/tenderness/pressure 29.6%, bruising 17.3%, swelling 15.5%. The first author discloses consultancy or research relationships with AbbVie, Galderma and Merz.
El Feghaly C, Tawa P. Late-onset upper eyelid edema following temporal hollow correction with hyaluronic acid. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2026;14:e7612. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41959944/
Single case: isolated persistent bilateral upper-eyelid swelling with unremarkable MRI and thyroid workup; blepharoplasty histology showed deposits consistent with hyaluronic acid without inflammation; the patient recalled temple filler two years earlier. The authors attribute it to migration through the temple's avascular gliding planes.
Complications associated with facial autologous fat grafting for aesthetic purposes: a systematic review. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2024. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38260755/
22 articles, 38 patients, 58 complications. Most followed forehead or temporal injection, and 53% of all severe complications occurred in the temporal region. A denominator-free review of reported cases, and it concerns autologous fat rather than calcium hydroxylapatite.
Beleznay K, Carruthers JDA, Humphrey S, Carruthers A, Jones D. Update on avoiding and treating blindness from fillers. Aesthet Surg J. 2019;39(6):662-74. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30805636/
Describes the retrograde embolism mechanism and reports that the average volume needed to fill the supratrochlear artery from the glabella to its bifurcation was 0.085 mL, range 0.04 to 0.12 mL. Level of evidence 5.
Green JB, et al. Panfacial rejuvenation with diluted and hyperdiluted calcium hydroxylapatite. Aesthet Surg J Open Forum. 2024;7:ojae119. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40084152/
The dilution ladder that describes undiluted calcium hydroxylapatite for deep structural support in areas including the temple. Case-series-level material published as a continuing-education activity with a Merz-linked faculty group.
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 in 16 countries; 62% reported at least one intravascular injection, and pain was mild or absent in 47% of those events. Self-selected respondents, recall-based, no denominator.
← Back to Radiesse