Facelift With Power-Assisted Dissection: A Preliminary Report

Stab access fascia suspension lift: A facelift technique without skin excision and visible scar

BACKGROUND

Traditional middle and lower facelifts are not suitable for patients with mild skin laxity or who wish to avoid incision scars.

OBJECTIVE

We present the stab access fascia suspension lift (SAFS-lift) technique, which does not require regular skin incisions, as a reliable surgical facelift strategy for the lower and middle face.

METHODS

From September 2020 to September 2021, 38 patients underwent SAFS-lift. SAFS-lift involved (1) incomplete subcutaneous undermining with hydrodissection-assisted tunneling; (2) complete subcutaneous undermining with a dissecting cannula in the zygomatic buccal groove area and hollow below zygomatic arch; and (3) maximal firm superficial musculoaponeurotic system suspension with polydioxanone barbed threads in loops. All patients evaluated the outcome according to the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale. Four plastic surgeons evaluated postsurgery result with a five-point Likert scale (5 = excellent, 4 = good, 3 = fair, 2 = no change, and 1 = worse).

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients were successfully enrolled. The mean follow-up period was 14.72 ± 3.89 months. No patients showed visible scarring 6 months after surgery. The minor complication rate was 19.4%. They all subsided within 1-6 weeks without treatment. No infection, hematoma, seroma, or facial nerve injury was observed. Patients' outcome ratings were 4.22 ± 0.58 (3 months), 4.69 ± 0.46 (6 months), and 4.69 ± 0.54 (1 year). Surgeons' outcome scoring was 3.98 ± 0.95.

CONCLUSIONS

Stab access fascia suspension-lift is a predictable, effective, and safe facelift technique that can be performed without making noticeable incisions and resecting the skin.

Hematoma After Non-Oncologic Breast Procedures: A Comprehensive Review of the Evidence

BACKGROUND

Hematoma after non-oncologic breast surgery is a common concern requiring expeditious treatment. The purpose of this study is to perform an evidence-based review of perioperative factors that may contribute to hematoma in non-oncologic breast procedures.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review was performed of non-oncologic breast procedures: breast augmentation, single-stage augmentation-mastopexy, mastopexy, and reduction. In total, 28 studies highlighting incidence and potential risk factors for hematoma were included; overall level of evidence was established regarding each perioperative factor examined and hematoma rate.

RESULTS

The hematoma rate in breast augmentation ranges from 0.2 to 5.7%. There is inconclusive evidence to support an association between pocket choice or incision location and hematoma rate (Level III) and no evidence of an association between implant type and hematoma (Level V). Single-stage augmentation-mastopexy may have a lower hematoma rate than augmentation alone (Level II). Hematoma may increase the risk of capsular contracture (Level III). In breast reduction, the hematoma rate ranges from 1.0 to 9.3%. Evidence of an association between incision choice and hematoma rate is inconclusive (Level III). Use of epinephrine-containing solution, pedicle choice, and resection weight do not appear to affect hematoma rate (Level V, II, and II, respectively). The use of postoperative drains and ketorolac do not affect the incidence of hematoma (Level I and III, respectively). Intraoperative hypotension may increase the risk of hematoma after breast reduction (Level III).

CONCLUSIONS

Breast hematomas are not uncommon complications. Current literature lacks ample evidence for risk factors for hematoma after non-oncologic breast procedures, warranting further, high-powered investigations.

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 .