Superciliary arch augmentation with silicone implant
10.3760/cma.j.cn114453-20210128-00050
- VernacularTitle:硅胶假体隆眉弓术
- Author:
Jianfeng LIU
1
;
Cai WANG
;
Jia QIAO
;
Xi FU
;
Bing YU
;
Ying CHEN
;
Qi JIN
;
Shixing XU
;
Feng NIU
Author Information
1. 中国医学科学院北京协和医学院整形外科医院颅颌面一中心 100144
- Keywords:
Silicone elastomers;
Exophthalmos;
Frontal bone;
Eyebrows;
Plasitc surgery
- From:
Chinese Journal of Plastic Surgery
2021;37(5):547-553
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To investigate the efficacy and safety of superciliary arch augmentation with silicone implant in the treatment of upper facial flatness.Methods:From July 2018 to September 2019, 42 cases aged from 20-32 (25.1±3.1) years old underwent superciliary arch augmentation with silicone implant. According to the anatomical characteristics of supraorbital margin and superciliary arch, A 7 mm surgical incision at the lower edge of the bilateral eyebrow tail was designed. The space was dissected close to the surface of superciliary arch bone and the carved silicone implant in accordance with the shape of the space was implanted. The effective part of the silicone implant was the lower edge, with a thickness of 2-7 mm. The middle part of of the silicone implant was the uppermost, corresponding to the inner third of the eyebrow. Each side of the implant had a small hole to allow tissues to grow in. The silicone implant at the eyebrow tail was sutured and fixed to the periosteum, and the vaseline gauze was packaged and sutured for external fixation at the eyebrow head. Photographs were taken and analyzed preoperatively, immediately after surgery, and at 6-18 months follow-up after surgery. Postoperative satisfaction was scored by patients, surgeons and laypersons according to the Likert 5 scale. SPSS Statistics 21.0 was used for statistical analysis using the Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test, and P < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Results:42 cases were followed up from 6 to 18 (9.0±3.2) months. 1case developed aseptic inflammation 6 months after surgery, and the implant was removed. Four cases were not satisfied with the facial contour and underwent revision surgery. 1 patient developed hematoma, which was absorbed 2 weeks after surgery. The other cases were all satisfied with the results, which were significantly improved compared with the preoperative profiles. The superciliary arch and the upper facial contour were more three-dimensionally defined and the face was more harmonious during the follow-up. All cases had normal expression. No capsular contracture, wound dehiscence and nerve injury occurred. The thickness of the implant (lower edge) was 2-7 mm[(4.53±0.77) mm]. Postoperative satisfaction score: the patient was 2.5-5.0 points, median 4.60(4.38, 4.85)points, doctors was 4.2-5.0 points, mean 4.85(4.70, 4.90)points, third-party was 3.7-5.0 points, median 4.80(4.66, 4.90)points. There was statistical difference in satisfaction rate among the three groups ( H=9.978, P=0.007). There was statistical difference in satisfaction between patients and surgeons ( H=9.978, P=0.009), patients and third-party ( H=9.978, P=0.049). There was no statistical significance in satisfaction between surgeons and third-party ( H=9.978, P=1.000). Conclusions:The superciliary arch augmentation can effectively reshape the facial contour, providing a more refined and three-dimensional face contour. Silicone implant can reliably enhance the superciliary arch and is the first choice for the superciliary arch augmentation. Full understanding of patients’ request, individualized surgery designare the keys to achieve satisfactory results of silicone implant superciliary arch augmentation.
