Aesthetic doctor injected woman with excessive dermal fillers, causing long-term side effects

Founder and medical director of The Artisan Clinic Isaac Wong Kai Jie caused his patient to suffer multiple side effects and complications following his injections of dermal fillers at high dosage.

PHOTO: SCREENGRAB FROM THE ARTISAN GROUP’S WEBSITE

Published Oct 13, 2026, 08:20 PM

Updated Oct 13, 2026, 08:21 PM

SINGAPORE – An aesthetic doctor injected a woman with more than three times the annual limit of dermal fillers in one session.

The patient later suffered various complications and side effects, including persistent pain on the left side of her face for more than 1½ years, high blood pressure and weight loss of 20kg.

She had to undergo a nerve surgery to manage the facial pain, and even lost her job as her medical issues took a toll on her.

After she filed a complaint with the Singapore Medical Council (SMC), the doctor, Isaac Wong Kai Jie, was given restriction orders by an interim orders committee (IOC) on Aug 26.

The various restrictions and conditions imposed by the IOC include a prohibition to offer and/or administer dermal fillers to anybody .

The four-member IOC, chaired by Institute of Mental Health’s psychiatrist and senior consultant Lee Cheng, said the conditions were imposed as “it was necessary for the protection of members of the public and in the public interest”.

Wong has appealed to the High Court to revoke the IOC’s orders. It is scheduled to be heard on Oct 28.

Details of the patient’s complaint against Wong were revealed in decision grounds published on the SMC website on Oct 7.

Wong, 43, is the founder and medical director of The Artisan Clinic, located in Paragon shopping mall.

The patient, who is not named in the decision grounds, first consulted Wong on April 1, 2023, and was recommended dermal filler injections.

She reported that Wong injected a total dosage of 7ml into her face in one treatment session on that day, when the packaging label stated 2ml as the maximum annual dosage.

After the injection, she told Wong that she experienced pain on the left side of her face.

Wong noticed discolouration of her left cheek and diagnosed her with a vascular occlusion – blockage of her blood vessel.

She said Wong then injected hyaluronidase into her face multiple times in an attempt to reverse and/or reduce the effects of the occlusion. Hyaluronidase is an enzyme that can break down hyaluronic acid, which is commonly found in dermal fillers.

From April 2, 2023, to Oct 8, 2024, she had follow-up consultations with Wong to manage various side effects and complications, including persistent pain on the left side of her face, neuralgia (intense burning or stabbing nerve pain) and neuritis (nerve inflammation).

During the consultations throughout this period, Wong continued to inject – among other things – hyaluronidase, growth factors and/or steroids into her face, she said.

Wong did this even though one of his colleagues said on one occasion in June 2023 that he was uncertain if hyaluronidase injections would necessarily be helpful.

The colleague was at the clinic with another patient on that day, and was brought into the consultation between Wong and the complainant on how to manage her condition.

Eventually, Wong’s patient underwent nerve surgery in August 2024 after separately consulting an ear, nose and throat (ENT) surgeon, an anaesthesiologist and a general practitioner for her condition.

In November 2024, she filed a complaint with the SMC against Wong.

She reported that her facial pain lasted at least 19 months, resulting in her experiencing high blood pressure, as well as changes in her appetite which led to her losing over 20kg.

She also reported losing her job, and that her mental well-being took a hit .

An independent complaints committee was appointed to look into the complaint. Pending its decision, it referred the complaint to SMC in January 2026 for the council to appoint an IOC.

The decision grounds noted that five other similar complaints alleging overdosing of dermal fillers and adverse effects had been filed against Wong.

In his written submissions to the IOC before the restrictions were imposed, Wong said that there was no risk of harm to members of the public if he was allowed to continue practising medicine, and there would not be potential adverse consequences.

Specifically, he disputed that the maximum annual dosage for that brand of dermal fillers was 2ml, pointing out that the manufacturer said in November 2025 that the maximum recommended overall dose for a single treatment session was 12ml, based on its latest toxicological report.

SMC rebutted that the manufacturer did the re-labelling only in March 2026. It was especially concerned that Wong had knowingly exceeded the annual 2ml regulatory limit in Singapore at the time of the incident that led to the complaint against him.

Wong also highlighted that the patient signed a consent form on the treatment day which stated that he had explained the risks and benefits. He also said an occlusion is an inherent risk, even with an appropriate administration of the fillers.

On SMC’s point that Wong continued to inject hyaluronidase despite there being no hyaluronic acid in the specific brand of dermal fillers, Wong explained that his purpose was not to dissolve the fillers, but rather to treat the blood vessel blockage as recommended by the manufacturer.

Wong said he had administered over 19,600 filler injections from 2018 to 2026, and had only one case of occlusion.

This meant that Wong’s incidence rate of 0.0051% was at the lower end of the rate of between 0.0024% and 0.04% cited in the expert report by a veteran plastic surgeon, which Wong obtained for his case.

He also said he has a high patient satisfaction rate from those who have received the specific brand of fillers from him, as shown by the 59 five-star Google reviews received.

SMC also said that Wong was not proactive in referring the patient to a specialist and did not appear to know how to detect or appropriately address side effects from dermal filler injections.

Wong said he did refer the patient in April 2023 to a doctor, who used hyperbaric oxygen therapy to treat her occlusion.

Singapore Medical Council

Healthcare professionals

Medical ethics/Bioethics

The Artisan Clinic 的创始人兼医疗总监黄凯杰 (Isaac Wong Kai Jie) 因注射高剂量皮肤填充剂，导致其患者遭受多种副作用和并发症。

图片：截取自 Artisan Group 网站

发布于2026年10月13日晚上8:20

更新于2026年10月13日晚上8:21

新加坡——一名美容医生在一次疗程中给一名女性注射的皮肤填充剂剂量超过了该女性年度限额的三倍。

患者后来出现了各种并发症和副作用，包括左侧面部持续疼痛超过一年半、高血压和体重减轻 20 公斤。

为了缓解面部疼痛，她不得不接受神经手术，而且由于健康问题，她甚至失去了工作。

在她向新加坡医学理事会 (SMC) 提出投诉后，医生黄启杰 (Isaac Wong Kai Jie) 于 8 月 26 日被临时命令委员会 (IOC) 下达了限制令。

国际奥委会施加的各种限制和条件包括禁止向任何人提供和/或注射皮肤填充剂。

由心理卫生研究所精神科医生兼高级顾问李成担任主席的四人国际奥委会表示，实施这些条件是“为了保护公众成员和公共利益的必要之举”。

黄之锋已向高等法院提出上诉，要求撤销国际奥委会的命令。该案定于10月28日开庭审理。

10月7日，新加坡医疗理事会（SMC）网站公布了针对黄医生的投诉详情。

43岁的黄先生是位于百利宫购物中心的匠人诊所的创始人兼医疗总监。

该患者（未在决定理由中透露姓名）于 2023 年 4 月 1 日首次咨询了 Wong 医生，医生建议其进行皮肤填充注射。

她报告说，黄医生当天在一次治疗中向她的脸上注射了总共 7 毫升的剂量，而包装标签上标明每年的最大剂量为 2 毫升。

注射后，她告诉黄，她左脸感到疼痛。

黄医生注意到她左脸颊变色，诊断她患有血管阻塞——血管堵塞。

她说，黄医生随后多次向她面部注射透明质酸酶，试图逆转和/或减轻闭塞的影响。透明质酸酶是一种可以分解透明质酸的酶，透明质酸是皮肤填充剂中常见的成分。

从 2023 年 4 月 2 日至 2024 年 10 月 8 日，她多次与黄医生进行后续咨询，以控制各种副作用和并发症，包括左侧面部持续疼痛、神经痛（剧烈的灼烧或刺痛）和神经炎（神经炎症）。

她说，在此期间的咨询过程中，黄医生继续向她的脸上注射——除其他物质外——透明质酸酶、生长因子和/或类固醇。

尽管黄的一位同事曾在 2023 年 6 月表示，他不确定透明质酸酶注射是否一定会有帮助，但黄还是这样做了。

那天，这位同事陪着另一位病人在诊所，并被叫来参加黄医生和投诉人之间关于如何处理她病情的会诊。

最终，黄医生的病人于 2024 年 8 月接受了神经手术，此前她曾分别咨询过耳鼻喉科医生、麻醉师和全科医生。

2024年11月，她向新加坡媒体委员会投诉黄某。

她表示，她的面部疼痛持续了至少 19 个月，导致她出现高血压，食欲也发生了变化，导致她体重减轻了 20 多公斤。

她还透露自己失去了工作，精神状态也受到了影响。

一个独立的投诉委员会被任命调查这起投诉。在委员会做出决定之前，该委员会于2026年1月将投诉转交给了SMC，由该委员会任命一名独立投诉专员。

判决理由指出，此前已有五起类似的投诉指控黄某过量注射皮肤填充剂并造成不良反应。

在限制措施实施之前，黄在向国际奥委会提交的书面意见中表示，如果允许他继续行医，不会对公众造成伤害，也不会产生潜在的不良后果。

具体来说，他反驳了该品牌皮肤填充剂的年度最大剂量为 2 毫升的说法，并指出制造商在 2025 年 11 月表示，根据其最新的毒理学报告，单次治疗疗程的最大推荐总剂量为 12 毫升。

SMC反驳称，制造商直到2026年3月才进行重新贴标。该公司尤其关注的是，在导致对其提出投诉的事件发生时，黄某明知故犯地超过了新加坡每年2毫升的监管限量。

黄医生还强调，患者在治疗当天签署了知情同意书，其中说明他已向患者解释了治疗的风险和益处。他还表示，即使填充剂注射得当，血管阻塞也是一种固有风险。

针对SMC指出黄医生在特定品牌的皮肤填充剂中不含透明质酸的情况下仍继续注射透明质酸酶，黄医生解释说，他的目的不是溶解填充剂，而是按照制造商的建议治疗血管阻塞。

黄医生表示，从 2018 年到 2026 年，他进行了超过 19600 次填充注射，只有一例发生血管阻塞。

这意味着 Wong 的发病率为 0.0051%，处于资深整形外科医生专家报告中引用的 0.0024% 至 0.04% 之间的较低水平，而 Wong 正是为他的病例获得了这份报告。

他还表示，接受过他提供的该品牌填充剂的患者满意度很高，从他在谷歌上收到的 59 条五星好评就能看出这一点。

SMC还表示，黄医生没有主动将病人转诊给专科医生，而且似乎不知道如何检测或妥善处理皮肤填充剂注射的副作用。

黄先生表示，他确实在 2023 年 4 月将该患者转诊给一位医生，该医生使用高压氧疗法治疗了她的血管阻塞。

新加坡医疗理事会

医疗保健专业人员

医学伦理/生物伦理