This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Cosmetic Surgery/ Procedures  • Alert me on articles by topic

Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2004;6:14-15.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In 1974, Skoog¹ described the technique of dissecting beneath the superficial musculoaponeurotic system (SMAS) of the lower cheek while leaving the overlying skin attached to the SMAS. This appeared to provide greater improvement of the jowl than conventional subcutaneous rhytidectomy. This report ushered in a revolution in rhytidectomy. The revolution was based on a plethora of anatomic studies that have identified ligaments, muscle expansions, and tissue planes not heretofore described in anatomic text. These studies have contributed to a better understanding of facial anatomy and of the changes of the face that occur with aging, especially in the midface. Concomitant with these anatomic reports were numerous clinical articles describing new surgical approaches to rhytidectomy. Most notably were descriptions of endoscopic, transoral, and transorbital approaches to midface lifting. A multitude of different planes of dissection in variable regions of the face have also been described. The most prominent of these have . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Shan R. Baker, MD
Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery
Center for Facial Cosmetic Surgery
University of Michigan
19900 Haggerty Rd
Livonia, MI 48152
(e-mail: shanb@umich.edu)

RELATED ARTICLE

Deep-Plane Face-lift vs Superficial Musculoaponeurotic System Plication Face-lift: A Comparative Study
Ferdinand F. Becker and Benjamin A. Bassichis
Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2004;6(1):8-13.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT