Brow lift in facial rejuvenation: A systematic literature review of open versus endoscopic techniques

Darrell W. Graham, Justin Heller, T. Jonathan Kirkjian, Timothy S. Schaub, Rod J. Rohrich

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Currently, there are many well-described surgical approaches to address brow aesthetics (i.e., open versus endoscopic versus combination techniques). Each technique has associated benefits and limitations. The authors' discussion in this article is intended to review current worldwide surgical approaches to brow aesthetics and to explore the following question: Are open brow lifts still pertinent in the modern era of cosmetic surgery? METHODS: A systematic review of current available literature for the dates 1992 until the present was performed using the MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAWL databases. Inclusion criteria required that individual studies contain original content; provide patient outcome data, including complications; and maintain a sufficient sample size of no fewer than 20 patients. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-nine articles were reviewed from the initial keyword searches of four major databases and plastic surgery journals. Fifteen articles were included in the analysis after careful review established that the necessary criteria were met. From direct analysis of these articles, no clear evidence exists to indicate that open methods of brow surgery are inferior to endoscopic approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Brow-lift surgery has clearly evolved since the inception of endoscopic techniques in the early 1990s. However, currently there are no prospective randomized trials in the literature that compare the surgical outcomes of differing approaches. This thorough review of current worldwide English-language literature highlights the relative paucity of good comparative studies and serves as a reminder that there is still an important role for the open approach to brow aesthetic dilemmas.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Volume128
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2011

Fingerprint

Rejuvenation
Esthetics
Plastic Surgery
Databases
PubMed
MEDLINE
Sample Size
Language

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Brow lift in facial rejuvenation : A systematic literature review of open versus endoscopic techniques. / Graham, Darrell W.; Heller, Justin; Kirkjian, T. Jonathan; Schaub, Timothy S.; Rohrich, Rod J.

In: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Vol. 128, No. 4, 10.2011.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Graham, Darrell W. ; Heller, Justin ; Kirkjian, T. Jonathan ; Schaub, Timothy S. ; Rohrich, Rod J. / Brow lift in facial rejuvenation : A systematic literature review of open versus endoscopic techniques. In: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 2011 ; Vol. 128, No. 4.
@article{ae19734f6b484fc596cf1e5e8935126a,
title = "Brow lift in facial rejuvenation: A systematic literature review of open versus endoscopic techniques",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Currently, there are many well-described surgical approaches to address brow aesthetics (i.e., open versus endoscopic versus combination techniques). Each technique has associated benefits and limitations. The authors' discussion in this article is intended to review current worldwide surgical approaches to brow aesthetics and to explore the following question: Are open brow lifts still pertinent in the modern era of cosmetic surgery? METHODS: A systematic review of current available literature for the dates 1992 until the present was performed using the MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAWL databases. Inclusion criteria required that individual studies contain original content; provide patient outcome data, including complications; and maintain a sufficient sample size of no fewer than 20 patients. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-nine articles were reviewed from the initial keyword searches of four major databases and plastic surgery journals. Fifteen articles were included in the analysis after careful review established that the necessary criteria were met. From direct analysis of these articles, no clear evidence exists to indicate that open methods of brow surgery are inferior to endoscopic approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Brow-lift surgery has clearly evolved since the inception of endoscopic techniques in the early 1990s. However, currently there are no prospective randomized trials in the literature that compare the surgical outcomes of differing approaches. This thorough review of current worldwide English-language literature highlights the relative paucity of good comparative studies and serves as a reminder that there is still an important role for the open approach to brow aesthetic dilemmas.",
author = "Graham, {Darrell W.} and Justin Heller and Kirkjian, {T. Jonathan} and Schaub, {Timothy S.} and Rohrich, {Rod J.}",
year = "2011",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182268d41",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "128",
journal = "Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery",
issn = "0032-1052",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Brow lift in facial rejuvenation

T2 - A systematic literature review of open versus endoscopic techniques

AU - Graham, Darrell W.

AU - Heller, Justin

AU - Kirkjian, T. Jonathan

AU - Schaub, Timothy S.

AU - Rohrich, Rod J.

PY - 2011/10

Y1 - 2011/10

N2 - BACKGROUND: Currently, there are many well-described surgical approaches to address brow aesthetics (i.e., open versus endoscopic versus combination techniques). Each technique has associated benefits and limitations. The authors' discussion in this article is intended to review current worldwide surgical approaches to brow aesthetics and to explore the following question: Are open brow lifts still pertinent in the modern era of cosmetic surgery? METHODS: A systematic review of current available literature for the dates 1992 until the present was performed using the MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAWL databases. Inclusion criteria required that individual studies contain original content; provide patient outcome data, including complications; and maintain a sufficient sample size of no fewer than 20 patients. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-nine articles were reviewed from the initial keyword searches of four major databases and plastic surgery journals. Fifteen articles were included in the analysis after careful review established that the necessary criteria were met. From direct analysis of these articles, no clear evidence exists to indicate that open methods of brow surgery are inferior to endoscopic approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Brow-lift surgery has clearly evolved since the inception of endoscopic techniques in the early 1990s. However, currently there are no prospective randomized trials in the literature that compare the surgical outcomes of differing approaches. This thorough review of current worldwide English-language literature highlights the relative paucity of good comparative studies and serves as a reminder that there is still an important role for the open approach to brow aesthetic dilemmas.

AB - BACKGROUND: Currently, there are many well-described surgical approaches to address brow aesthetics (i.e., open versus endoscopic versus combination techniques). Each technique has associated benefits and limitations. The authors' discussion in this article is intended to review current worldwide surgical approaches to brow aesthetics and to explore the following question: Are open brow lifts still pertinent in the modern era of cosmetic surgery? METHODS: A systematic review of current available literature for the dates 1992 until the present was performed using the MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAWL databases. Inclusion criteria required that individual studies contain original content; provide patient outcome data, including complications; and maintain a sufficient sample size of no fewer than 20 patients. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-nine articles were reviewed from the initial keyword searches of four major databases and plastic surgery journals. Fifteen articles were included in the analysis after careful review established that the necessary criteria were met. From direct analysis of these articles, no clear evidence exists to indicate that open methods of brow surgery are inferior to endoscopic approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Brow-lift surgery has clearly evolved since the inception of endoscopic techniques in the early 1990s. However, currently there are no prospective randomized trials in the literature that compare the surgical outcomes of differing approaches. This thorough review of current worldwide English-language literature highlights the relative paucity of good comparative studies and serves as a reminder that there is still an important role for the open approach to brow aesthetic dilemmas.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80052979798&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80052979798&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182268d41

DO - 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182268d41

M3 - Article

C2 - 21921747

AN - SCOPUS:80052979798

VL - 128

JO - Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

JF - Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

SN - 0032-1052

IS - 4

ER -