ArticleAesthetic surgery journal2026
Analysis of Craniofacial Microsomia and Facial Asymmetry: Approaches in Facial Feminization Surgery.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundComprehensive facial analysis among transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) individuals undergoing facial feminization surgery (FFS) has created new opportunities to investigate facial asymmetry in adults. Although craniofacial microsomia (CFM) is typically identified in infancy, milder forms may go unrecognized, leaving gaps in diagnosis and treatment.
objectivesThe authors of this study examine facial asymmetry, including CFM, among TGD patients undergoing FFS and discuss appropriate surgical strategies.
methodsAdults registered male at birth undergoing de novo FFS from 2020 to 2024 were retrospectively reviewed. CFM was diagnosed in patients with same-sided hypoplasia in multiple features, including skeletal structures, malar soft tissue, nerves, and the external ear. The OMENS classification characterized facial morphology. Descriptive statistics, Fisher's exact tests, and Mann-Whitney U tests were performed.
resultsAmong 175 patients with a median age of 28.0 years (interquartile range [IQR], 24.0-34.0 years), 11 (6.3%) were diagnosed with unilateral CFM and demonstrated greater orbital asymmetry, mandibular hypoplasia, ear anomaly, nerve impairment, and soft tissue deficiency compared with their non-CFM counterparts (total OMENS of 5.0 [IQR, 4.0-6.0] vs 0.0 [IQR, 0.0-1.0], respectively, P < .001). Asymmetry in at least 1 facial feature was observed throughout the entire cohort (83.4%). As for surgical maneuvers, to correct chin cants, patients with CFM often underwent osseous genioplasties involving asymmetrical vertical lengthening, whereas patients without CFM underwent symmetrical repositioning (3.3 mm [IQR, 0.0-4.1 mm] vs 0.0 mm [IQR: 0.0 mm], respectively, P < .001).
conclusionsCFM may be more common than previously estimated. For individuals with CFM seeking FFS, greater vertical chin manipulation with osseous genioplasty may improve symmetry and feminization. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 (THERAPEUTIC):
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.