ArticleJPRAS open2026
An anatomy-guided multi-vector thread lifting strategy for nasolabial fold correction: Technique refinement and clinical outcomes in a 22-patient case series.
Article in JPRAS open, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The nasolabial fold (NLF) is a key aesthetic concern in facial aging. Thread lifting offers a minimally invasive alternative to surgery but requires precise anatomical planning to ensure safety and efficacy. Objectives: To describe an anatomically informed, multi-vector thread lifting technique for NLF correction and evaluate clinical outcomes in 22 patients. Methods: Between March 2020 and December 2022, 22 patients (17 female, 5 male; mean age 47.2 years) underwent NLF correction using barbed threads for structural lifting and monofilaments for superficial volumization. Thread types and vectors were selected based on NLF subtype, skin thickness, and facial anatomy. Outcomes were assessed using standardized photographs and the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) over a follow-up period of 6-18 months. The number and type of threads used in each patient were determined individually based on anatomical assessment and fold characteristics, rather than a fixed protocol, to allow personalized optimization of outcomes. Results: At 6 months, 90.9% of patients showed "improved" or "much improved" results. At 12 months, this remained in 77.8% of those followed. Type II NLFs showed strong initial results but greater regression over time, while Type III folds demonstrated better long-term stability. Complications were minor and self-limiting, with no serious adverse events. Conclusions: This technique offers a safe, tailored, and effective approach for minimally invasive NLF correction when guided by anatomical principles.
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.