[Face-lift surgery in ambulatory]

Advances in Face-Lift Surgical Techniques: 2016-2021

BACKGROUND

Face-lift surgery is the most crucial and constantly evolving technique of facial rejuvenation. Periodic reviews synthesizing the latest face-lift techniques may help surgeons sharpen their surgical procedures.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted of the PubMed databases using the search term "face lift" and "rhytidectomy." Articles reporting rhytidectomy of the forehead/brow, midface, lower face, and neck were included. Sixty-nine articles were selected after independent screening by three of the authors. The Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine scale was used for evaluating evidence level.

RESULTS

Of the 69 candidate articles, 10 studies (15%) reported techniques of neck lifting; 10 studies (15%) introduced techniques of endoscopic brow lifting; 7 studies (10%) pertained to brow lifting without endoscopic techniques. The most frequently reported locations of rhytidectomy were the brow/forehead (20%), neck (19%), and face-neck (17%). Additionally, articles regarding Asian face-lifts (14%) have been increasing. The evidence level of the articles was generally low, with only 10 articles assessed as level 1-3 with 59 articles as level 4-5.

CONCLUSIONS

Face-lift articles with high-level evidence are still lacking. Prominently, forehead lifting and neck lifting have become upward trends of rhytidectomy in recent years, and the techniques of short-scar face-lift have been more valued.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

[Should surgeons keep performing drainage after breast reduction?]

OBJECTIVE

Despite the absence of "evidence-based medicine", the use of closed suction drainage in breast surgery is currently the standard practice. Its goal is to minimize the amount of fluid at the operation site, the dead space that can involve postoperative complications. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate that with or without drainage the complication rate is unchanged.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective and comparative study of two groups of breast reduction with and without drainage. Every complication has been recorded and statistically analyzed: seroma and hematoma, infections, wound breakdown, skin flap or nipple-areola complex necrosis, fat necrosis and reoperation.

RESULTS

A total of 138 breast reductions were performed (37 drained patients and 32 non-drained). Data collection of complications was done on average 10months after the operation (1-15). There was no statistical difference between the two groups regarding the complication rate. Our results confirm the ones found in the literature.

CONCLUSION

Except for specific cases (e.g. gigantomasty), this study demonstrates that after breast reduction, drainage is not appropriate. Drains do not reduce postoperative complications and can increase hospitalization length of stay (inducing higher costs). Furthermore, it is often source of pain, anxiety and discomfort for patients.