Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42465865›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in surgery2026

Anatomy-guided dissection plane selection in endoscopic brow lift: a narrative review of supraperiosteal, subperiosteal, and multiplane approaches.

Bo Zhou, Bo Liu, Tianyao Lan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Bo ZhouDepartment of Burn and Plastic Surgery, Yichang Central People's Hospital, Yichang, China.
Bo LiuDepartment of Burn and Plastic Surgery, Yichang Central People's Hospital, Yichang, China.
Tianyao LanDepartment of Burn and Plastic Surgery, Beihai People's Hospital, The Ninth Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Beihai, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endoscopic brow lift has become a widely adopted technique for upper facial rejuvenation due to its minimally invasive nature and favorable aesthetic outcomes. Compared with traditional open approaches, it offers reduced scarring, shorter recovery time, and a lower incidence of sensory complications. Three principal dissection planes are currently employed: the supraperiosteal (subgaleal), subperiosteal, and combined supra-subperiosteal approaches. Each plane differs in anatomical relationships, surgical exposure, biomechanical lifting mechanisms, and risk of neurovascular injury-particularly involving the deep branch of the supraorbital nerve. Recent anatomical and clinical studies suggest that supraorbital nerve tension plays a critical role in limiting brow elevation. Furthermore, considerable anatomical variability exists in the course of the supraorbital nerve, complicating surgical standardization. This review provides a comprehensive comparison of these three approaches, integrating anatomical insights, surgical outcomes, and clinical evidence. Particular emphasis is placed on nerve safety and the rationale for the multiplane approach, which may offer an optimal balance between surgical efficacy and complication avoidance.

Indexed as

anatomyendoscopeforeheadplastysubperiosteal approachsupraperiosteal approach

Identifiers

PMID42465865
PMCPMC13372966

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.