Download PDF
Facial Plast Surg 2024; 40(01): 009-018
DOI: 10.1055/a-2015-0853
Original Research

Single-Step Full-Face Surgical Treatment of the Facial Profile

Dario Bertossi
1   Unit of Maxillo Facial Surgery Head & Neck Department, Università degli Studi di Verona, Verona, Veneto, Italy
,
Luca Sacchetto
1   Unit of Maxillo Facial Surgery Head & Neck Department, Università degli Studi di Verona, Verona, Veneto, Italy
,
Salvatore Chirumbolo 
2   Department of Neurosciences, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, Unit of Human Anatomy, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
,
Giorgio Panozzo 
1   Unit of Maxillo Facial Surgery Head & Neck Department, Università degli Studi di Verona, Verona, Veneto, Italy
,
Krishan Mohan Kapoor 
3   Department of Plastic Surgery, Fortis Hospital Mohali, Chandigarh, Punjab, India
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The present study was performed to describe how much affordable, feasible, and straightforward is the approach the authors called “single-stage full-face surgical profileplasty,” tailored to greatly improve the surgery of the facial profiling setting and achieve complete profile correction at the same time. From January 2010 to May 2019, 113 patients (95 females and 18 males; aged 19 − 63 years) were surgically treated for full-face profile amelioration. Profile correction was performed by using a combination of five procedures out of other various previously experienced: forehead fat grafting, rhinoplasty, lip fat grafting, genioplasty, and submental liposuction. All patients were assessed at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months following surgery for assessing the surgical profile treatment (SPT) outcome and any possible side effects of the combined treatment. Facial profile stability at 1 year was taken as the completion point of this treatment. Arnett et al's “Soft Tissue Cephalometric Analysis” (1999) was used to clinically evaluate the soft tissues before and after the SPT. Patients' satisfaction was measured with the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8” at 3 and 12 months after surgery. Statistics were used for Arnett et al's evaluation. Almost all the values were consistent and reached the normal ranges indicated by Arnett et al (p < 0.001), confirming that the desired results of the surgical profileplasty have been achieved. Single-stage full-face surgical profile treatment helps in correcting faults of the global facial deformity, in every single treated area, providing an overall improvement in facial aesthetics and harmony. Obtaining the simultaneous correction in the whole face has also the advantage of avoiding multiple surgical procedures, reducing postoperative discomfort, and the overall risks for the patient due to multiple surgical and anesthetic procedures.

Keywords

beauty - profileplasty - Arnett et al's cephalometric analysis - aesthetic surgery - facial harmony


Publication History

Accepted Manuscript online:
18 January 2023

Article published online:
24 February 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Samizadeh S, Wu W. Ideals of facial beauty amongst the Chinese population: results from a Large National Survey. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2018; 42 (06) 1540-1550
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Kashmar M, Alsufyani MA, Ghalamkarpour F. et al. Consensus opinions on facial beauty and implications for aesthetic treatment in Middle Eastern women. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2019; 7 (04) e2220
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Fink B, Neave N. The biology of facial beauty. Int J Cosmet Sci 2005; 27 (06) 317-325
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Magne P, Salem P, Magne M. Influence of symmetry and balance on visual perception of a white female smile. J Prosthet Dent 2018; 120 (04) 573-582
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Carvalho B, Ballin AC, Becker RV, Berger CAS, Hurtado JGGM, Mocellin M. Rhinoplasty and facial asymmetry: analysis of subjective and anthropometric factors in the Caucasian nose. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2012; 16 (04) 445-451
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Langlois JH, Kalakanis L, Rubenstein AJ, Larson A, Hallam M, Smoot M. Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychol Bull 2000; 126 (03) 390-423
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Mantzikos T. Esthetic soft tissue profile preferences among the Japanese population. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998; 114 (01) 1-7
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Heppt WJ, Vent J. The facial profile in the context of facial aesthetics. Facial Plast Surg 2015; 31 (05) 421-430
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Perrett DI, May KA, Yoshikawa S. Facial shape and judgements of female attractiveness. Nature 1994; 368 (6468): 239-242
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Guyuron B, Lee M. A reappraisal of surgical techniques and efficacy in forehead rejuvenation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014; 134 (03) 426-435
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Kim JB, Kim SW, Chung JY. New surgical technique: bidirectional forehead narrowing and eyebrow lifting using regional flap mobility. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2020; 8 (05) e2836
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Romo III T, Yalamanchili H. Endoscopic forehead lifting. Dermatol Clin 2005; 23 (03) 457-467 , vi
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Rohrich RJ, Mohan R. Male rhinoplasty: update. Plast Reconstr Surg 2020; 145 (04) 744e-753e
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Ho OYM, Ku PKM, Tong MCF. Rhinoplasty outcomes and trends. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2019; 27 (04) 280-286
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Bertossi D, Giampaoli G, Verner I, Pirayesh A, Nocini R, Nocini P. Complications and management after a nonsurgical rhinoplasty: a literature review. Dermatol Ther 2019; 32 (04) e12978
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Bertossi D, Zancanaro C, Trevisiol L, Albanese M, Ferrari F, Nocini PF. Lipofilling of the lips: ultrastructural evaluation by transmission electron microscopy of injected adipose tissue. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2003; 5 (05) 392-398
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Carvas M, Tonnard P, Verpaele A. Rhinoplasty combined with centrofacial lipofilling to optimize facial proportions. Aesthet Surg J Open Forum 2020; 2 (03) ojz034
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Fulton Jr JE, Rahimi AD, Helton P, Watson T, Dahlberg K. Lip rejuvenation. Dermatol Surg 2000; 26 (05) 470-474 , discussion 474–475
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Ferretti C, Reyneke JP. Genioplasty. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 2016; 24 (01) 79-85
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Baus A, Rem K, Revol M, Cristofari S. [Prosthetic genioplasty versus osseous genioplasty in aesthetic chin augmentation: literature review and knowledge update]. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 2018; 63 (03) 255-261
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Vanaman M, Fabi SG, Cox SE. Neck rejuvenation using a combination approach: our experience and a review of the literature. Dermatol Surg 2016; 42 (Suppl 2): S94-S100
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Collins PS, Moyer KE. Evidence-based practice in liposuction. Ann Plast Surg 2018; 80 (6S, Suppl 6) S403-S405
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Patrocinio LG, Patrocinio JA. Forehead-lift: a 10-year review. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2008; 10 (06) 391-394
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Schultz KP, Raghuram A, Davis MJ, Abu-Ghname A, Chamata E, Rohrich RJ. Fat grafting for facial rejuvenation. Semin Plast Surg 2020; 34 (01) 30-37
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Collar RM, Boahene KD, Byrne PJ. Adjunctive fat grafting to the upper lid and brow. Clin Plast Surg 2013; 40 (01) 191-199
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Lighthall JG. Rejuvenation of the upper face and brow: neuromodulators and fillers. Facial Plast Surg 2018; 34 (02) 119-127
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Rohrich RJ, Afrooz PN. Primary open rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2019; 144 (01) 102e-117e
    Google Scholar
  • 28 Bellinga RJ, Capitán L, Simon D, Tenório T. Technical and clinical considerations for facial feminization surgery with rhinoplasty and related procedures. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2017; 19 (03) 175-181
    Google Scholar
  • 29 Arnett GW, Jelic JS, Kim J. et al. Soft Tissue Cephalometric Analysis: diagnosis and treatment planning of dentofacial deformity. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999; 116 (03) 239-253
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Koulaxouzidis G, Momeni A, Simunovic F, Lampert F, Bannasch H, Stark GB. Aesthetic surgery performed by plastic surgery residents: an analysis of safety and patient satisfaction. Ann Plast Surg 2014; 73 (06) 696-700
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Momeni A, Heier M, Torio-Padron N, Penna V, Bannasch H, Stark BG. Correlation between complication rate and patient satisfaction in abdominoplasty. Ann Plast Surg 2009; 62 (01) 5-6
    Google Scholar
  • 32 Larsen DL, Attkisson CC, Hargreaves WA, Nguyen TD. Assessment of client/patient satisfaction: development of a general scale. Eval Program Plann 1979; 2 (03) 197-207
    Google Scholar
  • 33 Burstone CJ. Lip posture and its significance in treatment planning. Am J Orthod 1967; 53 (04) 262-284
    Google Scholar
  • 34 Bertossi D, Lanaro L, Dell'Acqua I, Albanese M, Malchiodi L, Nocini PF. Injectable profiloplasty: forehead, nose, lips, and chin filler treatment. J Cosmet Dermatol 2019; 18 (04) 976-984
    Google Scholar
  • 35 Lundström A, Lundström F, Lebret L, Moorrees C. Natural head position and natural head orientation - Lundstrom. Eur J Orthod 1975; 1995 (17) 111-120
    Google Scholar
  • 36 Zacharopoulos GV, Manios A, Kau CH, Velagrakis G, Tzanakakis GN, de Bree E. Anthropometric analysis of the face. J Craniofac Surg 2016; 27 (01) e71-e75
    Google Scholar
  • 37 Godt A, Müller A, Kalwitzki M, Göz G. Angles of facial convexity in different skeletal Classes. Eur J Orthod 2007; 29 (06) 648-653
    Google Scholar
  • 38 Frank K, Freytag DL, Schenck TL. et al. Relationship between forehead motion and the shape of forehead lines—a 3D skin displacement vector analysis. J Cosmet Dermatol 2019; 18 (05) 1224-1229
    Google Scholar
  • 39 Xiao H, Zhao Y, Liu L, Xiao M, Qiu W, Liu Y. Functional/aesthetic measures of patient satisfaction after rhinoplasty: a review. Aesthet Surg J 2019; 39 (10) 1057-1062
    Google Scholar
  • 40 Vian HNK, Berger CAS, Barra DC, Perin AP. Revision rhinoplasty: physician-patient aesthetic and functional evaluation. Rev Bras Otorrinolaringol (Engl Ed) 2018; 84 (06) 736-743
    Google Scholar
  • 41 Kar M, Muluk NB, Bafaqeeh SA, Cingi C. Is it possible to define the ideal lips?. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2018; 38 (01) 67-72
    Google Scholar
  • 42 Ding A. The ideal lips: lessons learnt from the literature. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2021; 45 (04) 1520-1530
    Google Scholar
  • 43 Arroyo HH, Olivetti IP, Lima LFR, Jurado JRP. Avaliação clínica para avanço de mento: revisão da literatura e proposta de um algoritmo. Rev Bras Otorrinolaringol (Engl Ed) 2016; 82 (05) 596-601
    Google Scholar
  • 44 Naini FB, Cobourne MT, McDonald F, Wertheim D. Submental-cervical angle: perceived attractiveness and threshold values of desire for surgery. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2016; 15 (04) 469-477
    Google Scholar
  • 45 Prendiville S, Kokoska MS, Hollenbeak CS. et al. A comparative study of surgical techniques on the cervicomental angle in human cadavers. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2002; 4 (04) 236-242
    Google Scholar
  • 46 Newman J, Dolsky RL, Mai ST. Submental liposuction extraction with hard chin augmentation. Arch Otolaryngol 1984; 110 (07) 454-457
    Google Scholar
  • 47 Carruthers A, Carruthers J. A validated facial grading scale: the future of facial ageing measurement tools?. J Cosmet Laser Ther 2010; 12 (05) 235-241
    Google Scholar
  • 48 Solomon P, Sklar M, Zener R. Facial soft tissue augmentation with Artecoll(®): A review of eight years of clinical experience in 153 patients. Can J Plast Surg 2012; 20 (01) 28-32
    Google Scholar
  • 49 Kelly PJ, Kyngdon F, Ingram I, Deane FP, Baker AL, Osborne BA. The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8: psychometric properties in a cross-sectional survey of people attending residential substance abuse treatment. Drug Alcohol Rev 2018; 37 (01) 79-86
    Google Scholar
  • 50 Chang CJ, Yu DY, Chang SY, Hsiao YC. Comparing the effectiveness of laser vs. conventional endoforehead lifting. J Cosmet Laser Ther 2018; 20 (02) 91-95
    Google Scholar
  • 51 Coleman SR. Structural fat grafting: more than a permanent filler. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006; 118 (3, Suppl): 108S-120S
    Google Scholar
  • 52 Strong AL, Cederna PS, Rubin JP, Coleman SR, Levi B. The current state of fat grafting: a review of harvesting, processing, and injection techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015; 136 (04) 897-912
    Google Scholar
  • 53 Zide BM, McCarthy J. The mentalis muscle: an essential component of chin and lower lip position. Plast Reconstr Surg 1989; 83 (03) 413-420
    Google Scholar
  • 54 Chaushu G, Blinder D, Taicher S, Chaushu S. The effect of precise reattachment of the mentalis muscle on the soft tissue response to genioplasty. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2001; 59 (05) 510-516 , discussion 517
    Google Scholar
  • 55 Segner D, Höltje WJ. Langzeitergebnisse nach Genioplastik. Fortschr Kieferorthop 1991; 52 (05) 282-288
    Google Scholar
  • 56 Guyuron B, Raszewski RL. A critical comparison of osteoplastic and alloplastic augmentation genioplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1990; 14 (03) 199-206
    Google Scholar
  • 57 Wollina U, Goldman A. ATX-101 for reduction of submental fat. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2015; 16 (05) 755-762
    Google Scholar
  • 58 Ascher B, Fellmann J, Monheit G. ATX-101 (deoxycholic acid injection) for reduction of submental fat. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol 2016; 9 (09) 1131-1143
    Google Scholar
  • 59 Koehler J. Complications of neck liposuction and submentoplasty. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 2009; 21 (01) 43-52 , vi
    Google Scholar
  • 60 Wähmann MS, Bulut OC, Bran GM, Veit JA, Riedel F. Systematic review of quality-of-life measurement after aesthetic rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2018; 42 (06) 1635-1647
    Google Scholar