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 articles  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Cosmetic Surgery/ Procedures  • Alert me on articles by topic

Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2006;8:193-194.

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

We commend Litner and Adamson¹ for attempting to quantify the effects of redundant skin removal on separate aesthetic facial zones by using different techniques. Their patients underwent 3 progressively more extensive lifts on each hemiface, while all the other lift parameters were held constant. The study elucidates the effects of plication, imbrication, and deep-plane techniques on the cheek, neck, and jawline. By directly measuring the amount of redundant skin that can be removed without tension, the authors have presented an interesting model for objectively studying and comparing the efficacy of various surgical techniques. Their study highlights the significance of the deep-plane technique.

It is interesting that Litner and Adamson's study mirrors the senior author's (F.M.K.) 35-year experience in performing face-lifts. Initially in his career, patients underwent a minimally undermined face-lift with plication or imbrication of the underlying tissues. The results were satisfactory in most cases, but 21.7% percent of his . . . [Full Text of this Article]

AUTHOR INFORMATION
Frank M. Kamer, MD; Alexander Markarian, MD

RELATED ARTICLES

Limited vs Extended Face-lift Techniques: Objective Analysis of Intraoperative Results
Jason A. Litner and Peter A. Adamson
Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2006;8(3):186-190.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Superficial Musculoaponeurotic System vs Deep-Plane Face-lift
Ferdinand F. Becker
Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2006;8(3):191-192.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT