Midface-lift patient satisfaction: A 5-year follow-up study

ABSTRACT

Context: Several studies showed, from the clinical point of view, the advantages of the various techniques and surgical approaches to obtain facial rejuvenation. A few studies have highlighted the satisfaction or not of patients who underwent a traditional facelift; however, a long-term follow-up study measuring patient satisfaction with midface-lift surgery has not been published yet. Aims: The aim of this study is to measure individual patient satisfaction with the midface lift, to find out from each patient his/her level of satisfaction 1 and 5 years after the operation and to compare the results to assess the benefits of the surgery. Background: Several studies showed, from a clinical point of view, the advantages of the various techniques and surgical approaches to obtain facial rejuvenation; however, a long-term follow-up study measuring patient satisfaction with midface-lift surgery has not been published yet. Materials and Methods: Between January 2005 and January 2010, 163 patients underwent a midface lift. All patients were asked to complete a standardised survey 1 and 5 years after surgery, in order to measure outcomes among facial aesthetic patients. Statistical Analysis Used: The paired t-test. Results: All patients reported an improvement as a result of the midface lift. Statistically significant differences in judgement criteria were found for malar eminence and nasojugal groove. Almost all of the patients turned out to be completely satisfied with their appearance with the new look. Conclusions: Patients were extremely satisfied with their decision to undergo a midface lift and with the outcomes and quality of life following the procedure.

KEY WORDS

Facial rejuvenation - midface lift - satisfaction - survey

 

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

• REFERENCES

• 1 Ivy EJ, Lorenc ZP, Aston SJ. Is there a difference? A prospective study comparing lateral and standard SMAS face lifts with extended SMAS and composite rhytidectomies. Plast Reconstr Surg 1996; 98: 1135-43
• 2 Kamer FM, Mingrone MD. Deep plane rhytidectomy: A personal evolution. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2002; 10: 63-75 viii
• 3 Alsarraf R, To WC, Johnson Jr CM. The deep plane facelift. Facial Plast Surg 2003; 19: 95-106
• 4 Paul MD, Calvert JW, Evans GR. The evolution of the midface lift in aesthetic plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006; 117: 1809-27
• 5 Alsarraf R. Outcomes research in facial plastic surgery: A review and new directions. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2000; 24: 192-7
• 6 Alsarraf R, Larrabee Jr. WF, Anderson S, Murakami CS, Johnson Jr CM. Measuring cosmetic facial plastic surgery outcomes: A pilot study. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2001; 3: 198-201
• 7 Kosowski TR, McCarthy C, Reavey PL, Scott AM, Wilkins EG, Cano SJ. et al. A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures after facial cosmetic surgery and/or nonsurgical facial rejuvenation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009; 123: 1819-27
• 8 Sinno S, Schwitzer JA, Anzai L, Thorne C. Facelift satisfaction using the FACE-Q. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015; 136 (Suppl. 04) Suppl 144
• 9 Friel MT, Shaw RE, Trovato MJ, Owsley JQ. The measure of face-lift patient satisfaction: The Owsley Facelift Satisfaction Survey with a long-term follow-up study. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010; 126: 245-57
• 10 McCollough EG, Scurry Jr. WC, Shirazi MA. The “midface-lift” as a misnomer for correctly identifying procedures designed to lift and rejuvenate the cheeks and malar regions of the face. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2009; 11: 257-62
• 11 Ching S, Thoma A, McCabe RE, Antony MM. Measuring outcomes in aesthetic surgery: A comprehensive review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 111: 469-80
• 12 Krastinova-Lolov D. Le lifting facial sous-perioste. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 1989; 34: 199-211
• 13 Psillakis JM, Rumley TO, Camargos A. Subperiosteal approach as an improved concept for correction of the aging face. Plast Reconstr Surg 1988; 82: 383-94
• 14 Santana PS. Craniomaxillofacial methodology in ritidoplastias. Cir Plast Iberoam Latinoam 1984; 10: 321-50
• 15 Ramirez OM, Maillard GF, Musolas A. The extended subperiosteal face lift: A definitive soft-tissue remodeling for facial rejuvenation. Plast Reconstr Surg 1991; 88: 227-36
• 16 Tapia A, Ferreria B, Blanch A. Subperiostic lifting. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1991; 15: 155-60
• 17 Fuente-del Campo A. Reconstructive surgery of facial aging without scars visables. Cir Cir 1993; 60: 123-32
• 18 Ortiz Monasterio F. Aesthetic surgery of the facial skeleton: The forehead. Clin Plast Surg 1991; 18: 19-27
• 19 Isse NG. Endoscopic facial rejuvenation. Clin Plast Surg 1997; 24: 213-31
• 20 Dempsey PD, Oneal RM, Izenberg PH. Subperiosteal brow and midface lifts. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1995; 19: 59-68
• 21 Adamson PA, Dahiya R, Litner J. Midface effects of the deep-plane vs. the superficial musculoaponeurotic system plication face-lift. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2007; 9: 9-11