Ferdinand F Becker1, Benjamin A Bassichis. 1. Department of Otolaryngology -- Head and Neck Surgery, University of Florida College of Medicine at Gainesville, Florida 32969-1229, USA. patientrelations@ffbeckermd.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate deep-plane face-lift vs superficial musculoaponeurotic system (SMAS) plication face-lift in correcting the melolabial fold, jowl, and cheek areas of the face in short-term follow-up. DESIGN: Masked, randomized review by 4 board-certified facial plastic surgeons experienced in rhytidectomy of full-face (frontal, oblique, and lateral views) before-and-after photographs of 20 patients who underwent deep-plane face-lift and 20 who underwentSMAS plication face-lift. Participants rated the melolabial fold, jowl, and cheek areas for overall correction of the deformities pertaining to the aesthetic results for deep-plane vs SMAS plication face-lift. Categories were excellent, good, average, acceptable, and poor. RESULTS: Three categories of results were determined: best, average, and poorest. Overall, SMAS plication face-lifts scored higher than deep-plane face-lifts. In the best category, there were more SMAS plication face-lifts. In the average category, there were more deep-plane face-lifts. In the poorest category, there were equal numbers of deep-plane and SMAS face-lifts. Patients were divided into the following age groups: 50 to 59, 60 to 69, and 70 to 80 years. In the 2 younger groups, SMAS face-lifts scored higher than deep-plane face-lifts. In the oldest group, deep-plane face-lifts scored slightly higher than SMAS face-lifts. CONCLUSION: Deep-plane face-lift does not seem to offer superior results over SMAS plication face-lift in patients younger than 70 years.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate deep-plane face-lift vs superficial musculoaponeurotic system (SMAS) plication face-lift in correcting the melolabial fold, jowl, and cheek areas of the face in short-term follow-up. DESIGN: Masked, randomized review by 4 board-certified facial plastic surgeons experienced in rhytidectomy of full-face (frontal, oblique, and lateral views) before-and-after photographs of 20 patients who underwent deep-plane face-lift and 20 who underwent SMAS plication face-lift. Participants rated the melolabial fold, jowl, and cheek areas for overall correction of the deformities pertaining to the aesthetic results for deep-plane vs SMAS plication face-lift. Categories were excellent, good, average, acceptable, and poor. RESULTS: Three categories of results were determined: best, average, and poorest. Overall, SMAS plication face-lifts scored higher than deep-plane face-lifts. In the best category, there were more SMAS plication face-lifts. In the average category, there were more deep-plane face-lifts. In the poorest category, there were equal numbers of deep-plane and SMAS face-lifts. Patients were divided into the following age groups: 50 to 59, 60 to 69, and 70 to 80 years. In the 2 younger groups, SMAS face-lifts scored higher than deep-plane face-lifts. In the oldest group, deep-plane face-lifts scored slightly higher than SMAS face-lifts. CONCLUSION: Deep-plane face-lift does not seem to offer superior results over SMAS plication face-lift in patients younger than 70 years.