ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Customized Endoscopic Male Forehead/Eyebrow Lift.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Forehead Eyebrow Lift Techniques: Review of the Literature and Critical Appraisal of Long-term Efficacy.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigher hairline, thicker/heavier skin, and stronger eyebrow depressor muscles make the male forehead/eyebrow lift (FEL) challenging.
objectivesThe aim is to demonstrate senior author's 20-year experience with customized endoscopic FEL techniques in male subjects.
methodsThis is a surgical technique demonstration and chart review study on consecutive male subjects with customized endoscopic FEL (2007-2022). The customized technique was selected based upon the presence and severity of high hairline, thick/heavy forehead skin, forehead wrinkles, and subjects' perspective on the magnitude of the lift effect and skin incisions. Different scalp incisions and selective pull and fix techniques were used for zone 1 (central forehead), 2 (paramedian), and 3 (temporal) lifts. Last follow-up patient's satisfaction (visual analogue score, VAS) was recorded.
resultsOut of 895 FEL procedures during the study time frame, 107 (13.2%) were male with a mean age of 47.9 (27-79). Conventional endoscopic lift was performed in 48 (44.8%) and open pretrichial FEL in 38 (35.5%). Customized endoscopic FEL was performed in 21 (19.6%) in whom the most common scalp incision was retrotrichial vertical (57.1%) for the zone 1, pretrichial skin excision (71.4%) for the zone 2, and retrotrichial skin excision (90.4%) for the zone 3 lift. Simultaneous upper blepharoplasty was performed in all but one patient. Mean satisfaction score was 97.5 (100-VAS) at mean follow-up of 25.2 months.
conclusionsA customized endoscopic FEL technique is required in almost 20% of male subjects requesting a FEL procedure which resulted in high patient satisfaction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
40801929What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.