RESUMO
Background: Facelift procedures are a popular method of facial rejuvenation. The most common technique is superficial muscular aponeurotic system (SMAS) plication, with several variations. However, the optimal approach remains unclear. This review analyzed previous studies to compare SMAS facelift techniques, their outcomes, and complication rates. Methods: A systematic search was conducted using the MEDLINE, Cochrane, Embase, and Google Scholar electronic databases in September 2022. The search included studies published from January 2000 to September 2022 using keywords such as "facelift," "complications," and "outcomes." Results: This review examined 27 selected studies that evaluated 6 SMAS facelift techniques. The studies involved 6086 patients in total, over 85% of who were satisfied with the outcome of their surgery. The complication rates varied depending on the technique used, with the SMAS flap and composite SMAS technique having the highest (5.75%) and lowest (0.05%) complication rates, respectively. The most common complications were temporary facial nerve injury (0.85%) and skin necrosis (0.41%). To date, only one case of permanent facial nerve injury has been reported. Conclusions: On the basis of our findings, SMAS facelift techniques achieve high patient satisfaction rates, with complication rates that vary by technique. The composite SMAS technique showed the lowest complication rates, whereas the SMAS flap showed the highest rate. However, some studies have not reported all complications, making it difficult to determine the best approach. Therefore, future studies are required to identify the most aesthetically pleasing technique with the lowest complication risk.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: There has been a rapid increase in the number of patients undergoing non-surgical gluteal augmentation in recent years, leading to an increase in the number of articles in the literature regarding the use of hyaluronic acid (HA) for gluteal augmentation. No systematic review has been published on the effectiveness of HA for gluteal augmentation. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive review regarding the effectiveness and role of using HA for gluteal augmentation. METHODS: This review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses. We conducted a search across MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Google Scholar, using the following search keywords: gluteus, buttocks, gluteoplasty, gluteal augmentation, hyaluronic acid, and filler. RESULTS: Ten articles published between 2013 and 2022 that included 168 patients. The estimated duration of product effectiveness is 16.16 months. Most studies showed statistically significant improvements in patients' satisfaction. Mean volume of HA injected for optimal gluteal fat augmentation was 206.71 ml. Of included studies, two reported major complications, five patients experienced bruising and erythema as minor complications, five patients experienced effusion and inflammation at the injection site, three patients experienced gel dislocation, and one patient experienced irregular contours. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, HA is a predictable method for gluteal augmentation. Patients were satisfied with their outcomes. Despite gluteal augmentation with HA having a modest complication rate, it can still involve serious complications such as diffuse alveolar hemorrhage and death. There is a need for further research in a randomized control trial. 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 .