Barrett Dane M, Casanueva Fernando J, Wang Tom D
Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Facial Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
World J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016 Feb 4;2(1):38-44. doi: 10.1016/j.wjorl.2015.12.001. eCollection 2016 Mar.
Since the advent of facelift surgery, there has been a progressive evolution in technique. Methods of dissection trended towards progressively aggressive surgery with deeper dissection for repositioning of ptotic facial tissues. In recent decades, the pendulum has swung towards more minimally invasive options. Likewise, there has been a shift in focus from repositioning alone to the addition of volumization for facial rejuvenation. The techniques in this article are reviewed in a chronologic fashion with a focus on historical development as well as brief discussion on efficacy in relation to the other existing options. There is currently no gold standard technique with a plethora of options with comparable efficacy. There is controversy over which approach is optimal and future research is needed to better delineate optimal treatment options, which may vary based on the patient.
自面部提升手术出现以来，技术一直在不断发展。解剖方法倾向于采用更激进的手术方式，进行更深层次的解剖以重新定位下垂的面部组织。近几十年来，趋势已转向更多的微创选择。同样，关注点也从单纯的重新定位转向增加面部年轻化的容积填充。本文将按时间顺序回顾这些技术，重点关注历史发展，并简要讨论与其他现有选择相比的疗效。目前没有金标准技术，有大量疗效相当的选择。关于哪种方法是最佳的存在争议，未来需要进行研究以更好地确定最佳治疗选择，这可能因患者而异。
Zotero 插件
