ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Scar-Minimizing Full-Face Rejuvenation: A Novel Multiplanar and Multivector Approach Using Combined Forehead, Transoral Midface, and Limited-Incision Lower Face and Neck Lift Techniques.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFacial rejuvenation techniques must meet modern demand for natural results with minimal visible scarring. Traditional facelifts often fail to correct midfacial descent and multivector ptosis, especially in younger patients without significant skin laxity. We describe a multiplanar, triaxial facelift approach combining subperiosteal, subfascial, and sub-SMAS (superficial musculoaponeurotic system)/subplatysmal dissection through hidden incisions. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of a scar-concealing, multiplanar facelift approach that integrates forehead lift, transoral midface lift, and limited-scar lower face and neck lift techniques. The objective was to determine whether this combined strategy provides consistent midfacial elevation and natural facial harmony while maintaining minimal visible scarring and low postoperative morbidity.
methodsThis retrospective study included 216 female patients who underwent surgery between June 2021 and January 2024. The technique uses intraoral, retroauricular, and scalp incisions to enable multiplanar access. Midfacial repositioning was performed through dual-plane transoral fixation, while lower facial and cervical contouring was achieved via subplatysmal and sub-SMAS dissection.
resultsThe mean surgical duration was 167 minutes, with an average follow-up of 18.5 months. Patients demonstrated consistent midfacial elevation, improved contour, and enhanced overall facial harmony on postoperative clinical assessment and standardized photographic comparison. Complications were minimal and transient, including temporary facial nerve weakness and localized dimpling, all of which resolved without permanent sequelae.
conclusionOur scar-concealing multiplanar facelift approach provides a reliable and anatomically sound option for comprehensive facial rejuvenation, achieving consistent midfacial elevation and natural facial harmony with minimal visible scarring. The technique demonstrated durable esthetic improvement with a low complication rate, supporting its safety and effectiveness for appropriately selected patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: 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
42315787What 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.