A Long-term Evaluation: Deep Plane versus High SMAS Face Lift

Abstract

In the last few years, the Deep Plane Face Lift (DPFL) has gained great popularity among plastic surgeons, even if its origins are traced back to the 1970s. Certainly, it could have some advantages but based on our experience, it can reveal some unpleasant features in the long term. For this reason, the senior authors have adopted the high superficial musculoaponeurotic system (SMAS) Face Lift for many years in their surgical practice.

The goal of our study is to analyze the DPFL critical aspects in the long term and show how the High SMAS Face Lift (HSFL) technique can help to improve them.

Keywords

facial rejuvenation - cervicofacial lift - high smas face lift - deep plane face lift - SMAS dissection

Patient Consent

The patients provided written consent for the use of their images.

Publication History

Article published online:
16 January 2025

• References

• 1 Hamra ST. Building the composite face lift: a personal odyssey. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016; 138 (01) 85-96
• 2 Botti G, Botti C. Midface lift: our current approaches. Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir 2014; 46 (04) 224-233
• 3 Avashia YJ, Stuzin JM, Cason RW, Savetsky IL, Rohrich RJ. An evidence-based and case-based comparison of modern face lift techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg 2023; 152 (01) 51e-65e
• 4 Holländer E. XVII. Die kosmetische Chirurgie. In: Joseph M. ed. Handbuch der Kosmetik. Leipzig: Verlag von Veit; 1912: 668
• 5 Skoog T. Plastic Surgery: New Methods and Refinements. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 1974
• 6 Mitz V, Peyronie M. The superficial musculo-aponeurotic system (SMAS) in the parotid and cheek area. Plast Reconstr Surg 1976; 58 (01) 80-88
• 7 Rees TD, Aston SJ. A clinical evaluation of the results of submusculo-aponeurotic dissection and fixation in face lifts. Plast Reconstr Surg 1977; 60 (06) 851-859
• 8 Webster RC, Smith RC, Papsidero MJ, Karolow WW, Smith KF. Comparison of SMAS plication with SMAS imbrication in face lifting. Laryngoscope 1982; 92 (8 Pt 1): 901-912
• 9 Furnas DW. The retaining ligaments of the cheek. Plast Reconstr Surg 1989; 83 (01) 11-16
• 10 Hamra ST. The tri-plane face lift dissection. Ann Plast Surg 1984; 12 (03) 268-274
• 11 Hamra ST. The deep-plane rhytidectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg 1990; 86 (01) 53-61 , discussion 62–63
• 12 Mangat DS, Frankel JK. The history of rhytidectomy. Facial Plast Surg 2017; 33 (03) 247-249
• 13 Hamra ST. Composite rhytidectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg 1992; 90 (01) 1-13
• 14 Hamra ST. Repositioning the orbicularis oculi muscle in the composite rhytidectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg 1992; 90 (01) 14-22
• 15 Hamra ST. Frequent face lift sequelae: hollow eyes and the lateral sweep: cause and repair. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998; 102 (05) 1658-1666
• 16 Hamra ST. The zygorbicular dissection in composite rhytidectomy: an ideal midface plane. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998; 102 (05) 1646-1657
• 17 Barton Jr FE. The “high SMAS” face lift technique. Aesthet Surg J 2002; 22 (05) 481-486
• 18 Marten TJ. High SMAS facelift: combined single flap lifting of the jawline, cheek, and midface. Clin Plast Surg 2008; 35 (04) 569-603 , vi–vii
• 19 Botti C, Botti G. Facelift 2015. Facial Plast Surg 2015; 31 (05) 491-503
• 20 Jacono A, Bryant LM. Extended deep plane facelift: incorporating facial retaining ligament release and composite flap shifts to maximize midface, jawline and neck rejuvenation. Clin Plast Surg 2018; 45 (04) 527-554
• 21 Minelli L, Brown CP, Warren RJ, van der Lei B, Mendelson BC, Little JW. Lifting the anterior midcheek and nasolabial fold: introduction to the melo fat pad anatomy and its role in longevity and recurrence. Aesthet Surg J 2023; 43 (09) 941-954