We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Review
Complications of browlift techniques: a systematic review.
Aesthetic Surgery Journal 2013 Februrary
BACKGROUND: There is ongoing debate over which surgical technique is the safest for brow elevation.
OBJECTIVES: The authors outline complication rates for a variety of open and endoscopic browlift techniques based on the results of a literature review.
METHODS: The following databases were searched to capture relevant studies: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, Web of Science, Cochrane Libraries, controlled-trials.com, and clinicaltrials.gov. Eighty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Assuming between-study heterogeneity due to the limitations and biases inherent to case series, a random-effects model was used to calculate weighted proportions. Pooled weighted proportions with 95% confidence intervals were determined.
RESULTS: All open and endoscopic procedures are associated with a variety of complications. Unacceptable scarring and paresthesia are the most common complications among all surgical browlifts. For anterior hairline incision with subcutaneous dissection, alopecia occurred in 8.5% of patients, paresthesia in 5.4%, unacceptable scarring in 2.1%, and skin necrosis in 1.8%. For coronal incision with subgaleal dissection, unacceptable scarring occurred in 3.6% of patients, hematoma in 0.5%, and infection in 0.2%. Endoscopic techniques with subperiosteal dissection had the highest complication rates: 6.2% for paresthesia, 3.6% for asymmetry, 3.0% for alopecia, and 2.7% for lagophthalmos.
CONCLUSIONS: Although complication rates vary with respect to incision site and plane of dissection, endoscopic techniques are associated with a larger variety of complications than open approaches. The findings should be interpreted with caution due to the limitations inherent to a case series. A well-designed comparative study is needed to evaluate the "true" rate of complications among the various browlift techniques.
OBJECTIVES: The authors outline complication rates for a variety of open and endoscopic browlift techniques based on the results of a literature review.
METHODS: The following databases were searched to capture relevant studies: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, Web of Science, Cochrane Libraries, controlled-trials.com, and clinicaltrials.gov. Eighty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Assuming between-study heterogeneity due to the limitations and biases inherent to case series, a random-effects model was used to calculate weighted proportions. Pooled weighted proportions with 95% confidence intervals were determined.
RESULTS: All open and endoscopic procedures are associated with a variety of complications. Unacceptable scarring and paresthesia are the most common complications among all surgical browlifts. For anterior hairline incision with subcutaneous dissection, alopecia occurred in 8.5% of patients, paresthesia in 5.4%, unacceptable scarring in 2.1%, and skin necrosis in 1.8%. For coronal incision with subgaleal dissection, unacceptable scarring occurred in 3.6% of patients, hematoma in 0.5%, and infection in 0.2%. Endoscopic techniques with subperiosteal dissection had the highest complication rates: 6.2% for paresthesia, 3.6% for asymmetry, 3.0% for alopecia, and 2.7% for lagophthalmos.
CONCLUSIONS: Although complication rates vary with respect to incision site and plane of dissection, endoscopic techniques are associated with a larger variety of complications than open approaches. The findings should be interpreted with caution due to the limitations inherent to a case series. A well-designed comparative study is needed to evaluate the "true" rate of complications among the various browlift techniques.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app