Intranasal Surgical Approach for Malar Alloplastic Augmentation

Peña-Salcedo, Jose Abel de la; Soto-Miranda, Miguel A.; Lopez-Salguero, Jose Fernando

doi:10.1177/1090820x11430498

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The risk of vascular and nerve damage caused by subcutaneous dissection may be lower than that of subperiosteal dissection. Moreover, the intranasal approach probably decreases the risk of infection than the intraoral approach [8]. There were no infection cases in our patient population.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

“…Costal cartilage is also used to improve midface deficiency resulting in good long-term results [7]. The costal cartilage is carved into centimetre-level blocks and inserted into periosteal flap tunnels during rhinoplasty without sutures [8]. However, the long-standing direct pressure exerted by the blocks may damage the cranial bone causing complications, such as outer table skull erosion [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Paranasal Augmentation Using Diced Costal Cartilage for Midface Concavity: A Retrospective Study of 68 Patients

Dong

Han

et al. 2021

Aesth Plast Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Paranasal augmentation was effective management for midface concavity. Both alloplastic graft (e.g. silicone, porous polyethylene, or expanded polytetrafluorethylene) and autologous tissue (e.g. costal cartilage) were used for paranasal augmentation. The study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of paranasal augmentation using diced costal cartilage for midface concavity. Methods A retrospective review of demographic data and complications was conducted for consecutive patients who underwent paranasal augmentation using diced costal cartilage. A questionnaire was used for investigating the patient's satisfaction (i.e. overall satisfaction, bilateral alar bases symmetry, improvement of concavity, and foreign body sensation). Patients' photographs were used to evaluate aesthetic outcomes (i.e. overall satisfaction, bilateral alar bases symmetry, and improvement of concavity) by third-party doctors. Results Sixty-eight patients (60 females; mean age, 27.1 ± 8.2 years) were included. During a median follow-up of 6.5 months, costal cartilage migration occurred in 13 (19.1%) patients and partial resorption occurred in 2 (2.9%) patients. Seventy-five per cent of the patients and 98.5% of the doctors reported overall satisfaction. Bilateral alar bases asymmetry by 20 (29.4%) patients, no improvement of concavity by 13 (19.1%) patients, and foreign body sensation by 13 (19.1%) patients were reported. While bilateral alar bases asymmetry was not reported, improvement of concavity was reported in 67 (98.5%) patients by third-party doctors. On both univariate and multivariate analyses, improvement of concavity was significantly associated with patients' overall satisfaction (p = 0.008 and 0.045, respectively), while bilateral alar bases symmetry and foreign body sensation were not (all p [ 0.05). Conclusions Paranasal augmentation using diced costal cartilage seems a safe and effective method for midface concavity. Improvement of concavity may be significantly associated with patients' overall satisfaction.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Paranasal Augmentation Using Diced Costal Cartilage for Midface Concavity: A Retrospective Study of 68 Patients

Dong

Han

et al. 2021

Aesth Plast Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Peled et al [ 10 ] reported that silicone and Medpor have similar risks for infection. Silicone implants, when placed into appropriately sized pockets and held securely by surrounding tissues, are encapsulated by fibrous tissue with a minimal inflammatory response [ 11 12 ]. In our study, none of the patients experienced infection of the implanted pocket, nor did they experience capsular contracture around the silicone implant.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Silicone Implant-Based Paranasal Augmentation for Mild Midface Concavity

Kim

Jung

Lee

et al. 2016

Arch Craniofac Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMidface concavity is a relatively common facial feature in East Asian populations. Paranasal augmentation is becoming an increasingly popular procedure for patients with mild concavity and normal occlusion. In this study, we evaluate clinical outcomes following a series of paranasal augmentation.MethodsA retrospective review was performed for patients with Class I occlusion who had undergone bilateral paranasal augmentation using custom-made silicone implants, between October 2005 and September 2013. Patient charts were reviewed for demographic information, concomitant operations, and postoperative complications. Preoperative and postoperative (1-month) photographs were used to evaluate operative outcome.ResultsThe review identified a total of 93 patients meeting study criteria. Overall, aesthetic outcomes were satisfactory. Five-millimeter thick silicone implant was used in 81 cases, and the mean augmentation was 4.26 mm for this thickness. Among the 93 patients, 2 patients required immediate implant removal due to discomfort. An additional 3 patients experienced implant migration without any extrusion. Nine patients complained of transient paresthesia, which had resolved by 2 weeks. There were no cases of hematoma or infection. All patients reported improvement in their lateral profile and were pleased at follow-up. Complications that arose postoperatively included 9 cases of numbness in the upper lip and 3 cases of implant migration. All cases yielded satisfactory results without persisting complications. Sensations were fully restored postoperatively after 1 to 2 weeks.ConclusionParanasal augmentation with custom-made silicone implants is a simple, safe, and inexpensive method that can readily improve the lateral profile of a patient with normal occlusion. When combined with other aesthetic procedures, paranasal augmentation can synergistically improve outcome and lead to greater patient satisfaction.

show abstract

“…11,12 Intraoral, transpalpebral, transconjunctival, intranasal, and preauricular approaches have been described for the insertion of malar implants. 13 Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery • November 2022…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Zygomatic Implants through a Face-Lift Approach: Analysis of 30 Years’ Experience

Pelle-Ceravolo

Angelini

2022

Plastic &Amp; Reconstructive Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The use of zygomatic implants has been mostly replaced by fat grafting in rhytidectomy procedures. Furthermore, surgeons using implants prefer the intraoral approach. The authors aimed to describe and emphasize the usefulness of the preauricular approach as the best approach for this operation and underline the value of cheek implants as an alternative and/or as an adjunct to fat grafting during face-lift procedures for midfacial rejuvenation. Methods: A retrospective study of 350 patients who underwent face-lift procedures with silicone malar implant placement through a preauricular approach was conducted. Postoperative photographs of all patients were examined by two physicians for postoperative volume adequacy, naturalness of appearance, and improvement in asymmetry. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using a questionnaire with an ordinal scale. Results: The large majority of patients [338 of 350 (96.5 percent)] were completely satisfied or satisfied with the aesthetic outcome. The complication rate was very low and comparable to data reported in current literature. Conclusions: The application of cheek implants proved to be a great tool for midfacial volume rejuvenation with or without associated fat grafting. This conclusion was drawn from the answers reported in the questionnaires completed by the two examiners. The main challenge in this operation was the choice of the type, shape, and size of the implant. The preauricular approach should be given preference during this procedure because, compared to the other approaches, it is easier, faster, and more comfortable for both the patient and the surgeon. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.

show abstract

Intranasal Surgical Approach for Malar Alloplastic Augmentation

Abstract: The intranasal approach for alloplastic malar augmentation has shown good results for midface enhancement in the authors' hands. In this patient series, results showed excellent overall patient satisfaction and a very low (nearly 0%) complication rate.

Cited by 8 publications

References 15 publications

Paranasal Augmentation Using Diced Costal Cartilage for Midface Concavity: A Retrospective Study of 68 Patients

Paranasal Augmentation Using Diced Costal Cartilage for Midface Concavity: A Retrospective Study of 68 Patients

Silicone Implant-Based Paranasal Augmentation for Mild Midface Concavity

Zygomatic Implants through a Face-Lift Approach: Analysis of 30 Years’ Experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About