Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_5207_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
X
- •Preface for Second Edition
- •Contents
- •Contributors
- •1.1 Beauty Is Bone-Deep
- •1.2 Beautiful Facial Structure
- •2.1 Pearls
- •2.2 Introduction
- •2.3 Nerves
- •2.4 Vessels
- •2.4.3 Retromandibular Vein
- •2.5 Muscles
- •2.6 Fat
- •2.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •1.4 Beauty Keeps Changing
- •1.9 Why Global?
- •1.10 Surgeon’s Mission
- •References
- •3.1 Pearls
- •3.2 Introduction
- •3.3 Surgical Approaches
- •3.3.1 Intraoral Approach
- •3.3.1.1 Maxillary Vestibular Approach
- •3.3.2 Bicoronal Approach
- •3.3.3 Transcutaneous Approach
- •3.3.3.1 Sideburn Approach
- •3.3.3.2 Gillies’ Approach
- •3.3.4 Periorbital Approach
- •3.3.4.1 Subciliary Incision
- •3.3.4.2 Transconjunctival Incision
- •3.4 Key Technical Points
- •References
- •4.1 Pearls
- •4.2 Introduction
- •4.3 Surgical Instruments
- •4.3.1 Zygoma Reduction
- •4.3.2 Mandible Reduction
- •4.3.3 Genioplasty
- •4.4 Discussion
- •References
- •5.1 Pearls
- •5.2 Introduction
- •5.3.2 Clinical Evaluation
- •5.3.3 Radiologic Evaluation
- •5.3.3.1 Frontal Plane Analysis
- •5.3.3.2 Sagittal Plane Analysis
- •5.3.3.3 Transverse Plane Analysis
- •5.4.1 Chin
- •5.4.3 Asymmetry
- •5.4.4 Soft Tissue Contribution
- •References
- •6.1 Pearls
- •6.2 Introduction
- •6.3 Patient Assessment
- •6.3.1 Frontal Plane
- •6.3.2 Sagittal Plane
- •6.3.3 Transverse Plane
- •6.4 Surgical Technique
- •6.5 Key Technical Points
- •6.6 Case Study
- •6.7.2 Nerve Injury
- •6.8 Discussion
- •6.8.1 Approach: Intraoral Versus External Approach
- •6.8.2.3 Asymmetry
- •6.8.2.4 Soft Tissue Contribution
- •References
- •7.1 Pearls
- •7.2 Introduction
- •7.4 Surgical Techniques
- •7.5 Case Study
- •7.6.1 Nerve Injury
- •7.7 Discussion
- •References
- •8.1 Pearls
- •8.2 Introduction
- •8.3 Patient Assessment
- •8.4 Surgical Technique
- •8.5 Key Technical Points
- •8.6 Case Study
- •8.7.4 Asymmetry
- •8.7.5 Chin Ptosis
- •8.8 Discussion
- •References
- •9.1 Pearls
- •9.2 Introduction
- •9.3.1 Diagnosis
- •9.4 Surgical Techniques
- •9.4.1 Basic Osteotomy
- •9.4.3.1 Classic T Osteotomy
- •9.4.3.2 Two-Parallel Osteotomy
- •9.4.3.3 Bow Tie-Shaped Osteotomy
- •9.4.3.4 Diamond-Shaped Osteotomy
- •9.4.4.1 Inverted V-Shaped Osteotomy
- •9.4.4.2 Spade-Shaped Osteotomy
- •9.4.4.3 Bird-Shaped Osteotomy
- •9.5 Case Study
- •9.6 Discussion
- •References
- •10.2 Introduction
- •10.3 Patient Assessment
- •10.4 Surgical Techniques
- •10.5 Key Technical Points
- •10.6 Case Study
- •10.7.2 Hemorrhage
- •10.7.3 Unsatisfactory Chin Shape
- •10.1 Pearls
- •10.8 Discussion
- •References
- •11: The Mini V-Line Surgery
- •11.1 Pearls
- •11.2 Introduction
- •11.3 Surgical Technique
- •11.4 Key Technical Points
- •11.5 Case Study
- •11.7 Discussion
- •References
- •12.1 Pearls
- •12.2 Introduction
- •12.4 Surgical Techniques
- •12.4.1 Reduction Genioplasty
- •12.4.1.1 Two-Parallel Osteotomy
- •12.4.1.2 Inverted V-Shaped Osteotomy
- •12.4.1.3 Spade-Shaped Osteotomy
- •12.4.1.4 Bow Tie-Shaped Osteotomy
- •12.5 Philtrum Reduction
- •12.6 Key Technical Points
- •12.7 Case Study
- •12.9 Discussion
- •References
- •13.1 Pearls
- •13.2 Introduction
- •13.4 Surgical Techniques
- •13.4.1 Chin
- •13.4.2 Mandibular Implant
- •13.5 Key Technical Points
- •13.6 Case Study
- •13.7.1 Infection
- •13.7.2 Malposition
- •13.7.3 Bony Resorption
- •13.8 Discussion
- •References
- •14: Secondary Mandibular Contouring Surgery
- •14.1 Pearls
- •14.2 Introduction
- •14.3 Case Study
- •References
- •15.1 Pearls
- •15.2 Introduction
- •15.4 Surgical Techniques
- •15.4.1 Laser-Assisted Liposuction
- •15.4.2 Barbed Suture Lift
- •15.4.3 Elastic Lift
- •15.5 Facelift
- •15.6 Key Technical Points
- •15.7 Case Study
- •15.8.2 Neurapraxia
- •15.8.3 Infection
- •15.9 Discussion
- •References
- •16.1 Pearls
- •16.2 Introduction
- •16.3.1 Preoperative Analysis
- •16.3.1.1 Frontal Evaluation
- •16.3.1.2 Three-Quarter Oblique Evaluation
- •Hinderer Analysis
- •Wilkinson Analysis
- •16.3.1.3 Basal Evaluation
- •Zygomatic Arch
- •Zygomatic Body
- •16.3.2 Additional Considering Points
- •16.3.2.1 Soft Tissue Contribution
- •16.4 Discussion
- •References
- •17.1 Pearls
- •17.2 Introduction
- •17.4 Zygomatic Body Analysis
- •17.4.1 Hinderer Analysis
- •17.4.2 Wilkinson Analysis
- •17.5 Zygomatic Arch Analysis
- •17.6 Midfacial Soft Tissue
- •17.7 Surgical Techniques
- •17.7.2 Anterior Osteotomy
- •17.7.3 Posterior Osteotomy
- •17.7.4 Fixation
- •17.8 Key Technical Points
- •17.9 Case Study
- •17.11 Discussion
- •References
- •18.1 Pearls
- •18.2 Introduction
- •18.3 Patient Assessment
- •18.4 Surgical Technique
- •18.5 Key Technical Points
- •18.7 Discussion
- •References
- •19.1 Pearls
- •19.2 Introduction
- •19.4 Surgical Techniques
- •19.4.1 Tripod Osteotomy
- •19.4.2 Orbital Rim Shaving
- •19.5 Key Technical Points
- •19.6 Case Study
- •19.8 Discussion
- •References
- •20: The Mini-Zygoma Reduction Surgery
- •20.1 Pearls
- •20.2 Introduction
- •20.3 Patient Assessment
- •20.4 Surgical Technique
- •20.5 Key Technical Points
- •20.6 Case Study
- •20.8 Discussion
- •References
- •21.1 Pearls
- •21.2 Introduction
- •21.4 Surgical Techniques
- •21.5 Key Technical Points
- •21.6 Case Study
- •21.7.1 Infection
- •21.7.2 Sensory Disturbance
- •21.7.4 Asymmetry
- •21.8 Discussion
- •21.8.2 Host-Implant Interaction
- •21.8.3 Immobilization
- •References
- •22: Secondary Zygoma Reduction
- •22.1 Pearls
- •22.2 Introduction
- •22.3 Patient Assessment
- •22.4 Surgical Technique
- •22.5 Cases
- •22.7 Discussion
- •References
- •23.1 Pearls
- •23.2 Introduction
- •23.3.1 Preoperative Evaluation
- •23.3.2 Patient Selection
- •23.3.2.1 Lowering Lateral Canthoplasty (LLC)
- •23.3.2.2 Midface Lifting Procedure
- •23.4 Surgical Technique
- •23.5 Cases
- •23.6 Discussion
- •References

198
S. Park
References
1. Lee YH, Lee SW.Zygomatic nonunion after reduction malarplasty. J Craniofac Surg. 2009;20:849–52.
2. Baek SM, Chung YD, Kim SS. Reduction malarplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1991;88:53–61.
3. Kim T, Baek SH, Choi JY. Reduction malarplasty
according to esthetic facial unit analysis: retrospective clinical study of 23 cases. J Oral Maxillofac Surg.
2014;72:1565–78.
4. Satoh K, Watanabe K.Correction of prominent zygomata by tripod osteotomy of the malar bone. Ann
Plast Surg. 1993;31:462–6.

The Mini-Zygoma Reduction Surgery
SanghoonPark
20
20.1 Pearls
1. There is a growing trend in facial bone contouring surgery toward addressing mild or borderline problems with minimally invasive
methods. This shift reects patient preferences
for less intensive procedures, quicker recovery
times, and reduced postoperative discomfort.
2. Traditional full-scale reduction malarplasty
often requires general anesthesia and can be
more invasive. While previously introduced
minimally invasive techniques offered a less
invasive approach, they sometimes lacked
surgical stability and reliability, raising concerns about their effectiveness. Thess procedures fail to survive because of unpredictability
of outcome and complications due to lack of
adeqaute xation.
3. The mini-zygoma reduction surgery is particularly indicated for patients who desire
minimal invasiveness combined with surgical
reliability. It’s most suitable for those with a
chief complaint of wide midface width due to
isolated zygomatic arch protrusion, without
signicant prominence of the zygomatic
body. In patients with borderline hypertrophy
S. Park (*)
Center for Facial Bone Surgery, Department of
Plastic Surgery, ID Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
e-mail: spark@idhospital.com
of the zygomatic body, there is a concern of
postoperative complaint of under-correction,
choice of mini-zygoma reduction surgery
should be carefully consulted.
4. Despite the minimally invasive nature of the
procedure, rigid xation is crucial to ensure
stable and reproducible aesthetic results. This
aspect of the surgery helps in maintaining the
position of the osteotomized segments and
preventing postoperative complications.
5. The surgery involves complete osteotomy of
the zygomatic body and arch, performed
through both temporal and sideburn incisions
under local anesthesia. Following the inward
repositioning of the osteotomized zygoma
segment, rigid xation is achieved on the
zygomatic arch using metal xtures. This
approach minimizes invasiveness while ensuring stability.
6. Patients undergoing mini-zygoma reduction
surgery typically experience fast recovery and
minimal postoperative swelling. The technique ensures stability of the bony segments,
preventing displacement and aiding in quicker
healing.
7. The mini-zygoma reduction surgery is a viable option for patients with minimal zygomatic arch prominence who seek a minimally
invasive procedure. Its predictability and reliability are ensured through rigid xation,
making it a preferred choice for specic
patient groups.
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2024
S. Park (ed.), Facial Bone Contouring Surgery, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-4992-8_20
199

200
S. Park
20.2 Introduction
The reduction malarplasty is popular especially
among the Asian population which is widely performed for patients with prominent cheekbones
with a wide facial contour [1–5]. For patients who
have a wide facial appearance resulting from the
lateral protrusion of the zygomatic arch even
without any excessive zygomatic body prominence, a conventional reduction malarplasty may
be improper and overly invasive.
Typically, reduction malarplasty procedures
are conducted under general anesthesia to ensure
patient safety and airway protection during the
surgery. In recent times, there’s been a growing
demand for simpler, less invasive methods to
enhance facial contours. In response, some
studies have explored reduction malarplasty via
alternative approaches such as the Gillies temporal method or small preauricular incisions, eliminating the need for intraoral incisions. Despite
being minimally invasive, these techniques often
lack rigid xation, leading to unpredictable outcomes and potential risks like bony nonunion [1].
To address these limitations, our clinic has developed the “mini-zygoma reduction surgery,” an
compromizing approach that maintains the minimally invasive nature of the procedure while
incorporating necessary xation techniques. This
modication ensures more reliable and consistent
results, aligning with the evolving preferences of
patients seeking facial contour improvements [1].
20.4 Surgical Technique
Operations are usaully conducted under local
anesthesia, complemented by intravenous sedation. The process begins with inltrating a solution
containing 1% lidocaine and 1:100,000 epinephrine into the proposed incision lines. An initial
incision is made in the sideburn area, granting
access to the posterior portion of the zygomatic
arch (Fig. 20.1. Special care is taken during this
step due to the proximity of the frontal branch of
the facial nerve. Upon reaching the periosteal layer
of the zygomatic arch, a precise incision on the
periosteum was executed. This allows for subperiosteal dissection to expose the osteotomy and xation site, and a reciprocating saw is then used to
perform a complete osteotomy just in front of the
anterior tubercle of the zygomatic arch [1].
Additionally, a 2cm incision is made in the
temporal area, situated approximately 2cm posterior to the temporal hairline and 5cm above the
helical root of the ear. The incision is deepened to
expose the temporalis muscle. The surgical pathway between the deep layer of deep temporal fas-
20.3 Patient Assessment
Patients must thoroughly analyzed by physical
examination together with imaging studies
including clinical photographs, cephalometric
and panoramic radiographs, and threedimensional computed tomography. Preoperative
status of any degree of facial nerve weakness or
abnormality of the temporomandibular joint
should also be identied preoperatively. Patients
with isolated zygomatic arch protrusion without
any hypertrophy in the zygomatic body region is
the proper indication for the mini- zygoma reduction surgery.
Fig. 20.1 Illustration of the mini-zygoma reduction surgery. First, osteotomy of the zygomatic arch is performed
through a sideburn incision using a reciprocating saw.
Then, osteotomy on the zygomatic body is done through a
temporal incision with a J-shaped reciprocating saw

20 The Mini-Zygoma Reduction Surgery
cia and the temporalis muscle facilitates blunt
dissection down to the posterior margin of the
temporal process of the zygomatic body. Using a
periosteal elevator, the posterior side of the periosteum on the temporal process of the zygomatic
body is elevated. Complete osteotomy is performed with the reciprocating saw, under the
careful guidance of palpation from the nondominant hand (Fig.20.1). Notably, the anterior side
of the zygomatic body remains less touched even
after completing the osteotomy (Figs. 20.1 and
20.2) [1].
After completing the osteotomy on the zygo-
matic body, the movability of the zygomatic arch
becomes apparent through the sideburn approach.
The arch is then repositioned inward to align with
the preoperative surgical plan. To ensure a smooth
transition and minimize the palpability of bony
steps, bone shaving is performed at the osteotomy
margins using a surgical burr. This process blunts
any sharp osteotomy edges, contributing to a
more rened surgical outcome. Subsequently, the
zygomatic arch is rigidly xed in place using a
prebent three-hole linear titanium plate and
screws [3]. This xation is crucial as it enables the
osteotomized arch segment to withstand the
downward and rotational forces exerted by the
attached musculature, as depicted in Fig.20.3 [1].
201
Fig. 20.2 Intraoperative photographs of the mini-zygoma
reduction surgery. The zygomatic arch is completely osteotomized through a sideburn incision (above). The zygomatic body is osteotomized through a temporal incision,
while the anterior side of the periosteum of the zygomatic
body is left intact to minimize bone displacement (below).
After all osteotomies are completed, the zygomatic arch is
rigidly xed with metal xtures via the sideburn incision
Intraoral Variation Osteotomy in zygomatic
body can be done with 1cm incision in intraoral
maxillary vestibule. A periosteal elevator is
inserted, and the posterior side of the periosteum
on the temporal process of the zygomatic body is
elevated, and complete osteotomy is performed
with a reciprocating saw, guided under careful
palpation of the nondominant hand. As it is done
under local anesthesia, osteotomy should be fast
and minimal to reduce the risk of bleeding.

202
S. Park
Fig. 20.3 Comparison on preoperative and postoperative imaging studies. Preoperative and postoperative threedimensional computed tomographic images (above). Preoperative and postoperative zygomatic arch view radiographs
(below)
20.5 Key Technical Points
3. In situations where the protrusion of the zygomatic arch begins posterior to the anterior
1. When accessing the zygomatic arch through a
sideburn incision, it is recommended to
employ blunt dissection through the subcutaneous fatty layer. This approach is preferable
over the use of electrocautery or sharp scissors, as it minimizes the risk of injury to the
frontal branch of the facial nerve.
2. After completing the osteotomy on the zygomatic body, it is crucial to verify the mobility of
the zygomatic arch before withdrawing the saw
from the osteotomy site. If further adjustment
tubercle, additional burring at the posterior
part of the osteotomy site on the arch may
enhance the aesthetic outcome.
4. Postoperatively, patients are typically able to
be discharged on the same day as the surgery.
They are advised to adhere to a soft diet for
the rst 2weeks following the procedure and
to avoid any trauma or direct pressure on the
surgical area for approximately 6 weeks to
ensure proper healing and to maintain the
integrity of the surgical results.
is needed, repositioning the saw accurately at
the initial osteotomy site can be challenging.

20 The Mini-Zygoma Reduction Surgery
20.6 Case Study
Case 1 (Fig.20.4)
A 28-year-old man with an outward protrusion of the zygomatic arch underwent the minizygoma reduction surgery. A concomitant mandibular reduction was performed. The protrusion
of the zygomatic bone is efciently improved resulting in a reduction of the midface width and
a smooth facial contour (Fig.20.4).
203
Fig. 20.4 Preoperative view of a 28-year-old man who underwent the mini-zygoma reduction surgery (left) and
postoperative view at 4months after the surgery (right)

204
Case 2 (Fig.20.5)
A 21-year-old woman with lateral prominence in her midface region was planned for the minizygoma reduction surgery. Botulinum toxin injection was done together to treat her masseteric
hypertrophy. The outwardly protruding portion of the zygomatic bone was reduced to result in
a slender and smooth facial contour and to a more feminine appearance (Fig.20.5).
S. Park
Fig. 20.5 Preoperative view of a 21-year-old woman who underwent the mini-zygoma reduction surgery (left)
and postoperative view at 3months after the surgery (right)
20.7 Complications
andManagement
The most common aesthetic concern following
the procedure was undercorrection of the zygomatic body. Approximately 10.6% of patients
According to the ndings from a study conducted
at the authors’ institution, the mini-zygoma
reduction surgery was performed on an outpatient
basis without signicant immediate complications such as unanticipated bleeding or nerve
injuries [1]. None of the patients required hospitalization for postoperative care. Other serious
complications like facial nerve paralysis, hematoma, infection, nonunion, or malunion of the
bone segments were also not observed in the
study.
expressed dissatisfaction with their results, primarily citing residual prominence in the zygomatic body [1]. Notably, many of these dissatised
patients had initially declined a more extensive
zygoma reduction surgery under general anesthesia, as recommended by their surgeon. Some
patients who were unhappy with their minizygoma reduction outcomes subsequently opted
for conventional zygoma reduction surgery to
achieve more satisfactory results [1]. In a few
instances, the prominence of the zygomatic body

20 The Mini-Zygoma Reduction Surgery
205
became more noticeable postoperatively due to
the reduction of the zygomatic arch, leading to a
relative accentuation of the body. These ndings
underscore the importance of surgeons applying
strict criteria when selecting candidates for minizygoma reduction surgery to prevent the need for
further surgical intervention and to enhance
patient satisfaction.
20.8 Discussion
In comparison to the conventional bi-coronal
approach, the intraoral approach with a pretragal
incision reduces surgical effort and time.
However, this method necessitates general anesthesia to ensure patient safety, as bleeding or
saline used for irrigation can potentially enter the
airway, posing a risk of respiratory complications
[1, 6]. Soft tissue sagging or cheek drooping is a
major concern post-zygoma reduction surgery,
often attributed to extensive dissection during the
intraoral approach. Postoperative care for patients
with intraoral incisions includes dietary precautions to prevent wound contamination.
Zygomatic protrusion can manifest as either a
protruding zygomatic body or arch, or occasionally both [1, 3, 7, 8]. Traditional malar reduction
techniques target both the zygomatic body and
arch [9–14]. However, not all patients with a
wide midface have signicant zygomatic body
protrusion. Approximately 10% of patients seen
at the authors’ institute presented with isolated
zygomatic arch protrusion, without notable zygomatic body prominence.
For patients with only zygomatic arch protrusion, an intraoral approach is unnecessary and a
simpler surgical method can be employed without general anesthesia. This approach reduces the
risk of complications typically associated with
intraoral procedures.
Minimally invasive zygoma reduction techniques previously introduced often do not utilize
rigid xation [6, 15]. This can lead to complications like downward displacement, malunion, or
nonunion of the osteotomized zygomatic bone
segment. Our mini-zygoma reduction surgery
addresses this by implementing rigid xation
through a sideburn incision [1]. Rigid xation
counters the downward and rotational forces
exerted by the masseter muscle, ensuring longterm stability. Utilization of a prebent titanium
plate allows for precise repositioning of the zygomatic arch and correction of asymmetry [1, 2].
In patients with mild hypertrophy of the zygomatic body, the approach to zygomatic osteotomy
needs to be carefully considered. When a surgeon
attempts to make an osteotomy line deeper into the
zygomatic body in this limited exposure, it can
present several challenges. Firstly, this approach
can make the osteotomy more complex and technically demanding. Secondly, and more importantly, it increases the risk of bleeding, which is a
signicant concern in this surgical procedure.
Given these considerations, this approach is generally not recommended for such cases [16, 17].
In summary, patient evaluation for zygoma
reduction surgery must carefully determine the
need for reducing the zygomatic body. In cases of
isolated zygomatic arch protrusion, the minizygoma reduction technique offers a simpler and
effective solution for midface aesthetic improvement, suitable for outpatient procedures.
References
1. Park S, Kim DH, Kim T, Lee TS. The minizygoma reduction surgery: a simple and reliable
approach for mid-face narrowing. J Craniofac Surg.
2016;27:1298–301.
2. Yang DB, Park HS, Park CG.Technical renements
of infracture for the zygomatic body and arch reduction. Aesth Plast Surg. 1998;22:380–90.
3. Lee TS.Standardization of surgical techniques used
in facial bone contouring. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet
Surg. 2015;68:1694–700.
4. Experience in East Asian MX. Facial recontouring:
reduction malarplasty and mandibular reshaping.
Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2010;12:222–9.
5. Morris DE, Moaveni Z, Lo LJ.Aesthetic facial skeletal contouring in the Asian patient. Clin Plast Surg.
2007;34:547–56.
6. Rhee DY, Kim SH, Shin DH, Uhm KI, Song WC, Koh
KS, Choi HG.Lateral facial contouring via a single
preauricular incision. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg.
2012;65:e205–12.
7. Yang DB, Chung JY.Infracture technique for reduction malarplasty with a short preauricular incision.

206
S. Park
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;113:1253–61; discussion
1262–1253.
8. Nagasao T, Nakanishi Y, Shimizu Y, Hatano A,
Miyamoto J, Fukuta K, Kishi K.An anatomical study
on the position of the summit of the zygoma: theoretical bases for reduction malarplasty. Plast Reconstr
Surg. 2011;128:1127–38.
9. Wang T, Gui L, Tang X, Liu J, Yu D, Peng Z, Song
B, Song T, Niu F, Yu B.Reduction malarplasty with
a new L-shaped osteotomy through an intraoral
approach: retrospective study of 418 cases. Plast
Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:1245–53.
10. Kook MS, Jung S, Park HJ, Ryu SY, Oh HK.Reduction
malarplasty using modied L-shaped osteotomy. J
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;70:e87–91.
11. Ma YQ, Zhu SS, Li JH, Luo E, Feng G, Liu Y, Hu
J. Reduction malarplasty using an L-shaped osteotomy through intraoral and sideburns incisions. Aesth
Plast Surg. 2011;35:237–41.
12. Kim YH, Seul JH.Reduction malarplasty through an
intraoral incision: a new method. Plast Reconstr Surg.
2000;106:1514–9.
13. Hong SE, Liu SY, Kim JT, Lee JH.Intraoral zygoma
reduction using L-shaped osteotomy. J Craniofac
Surg. 2014;25:758–61.
14. Qiu S, Gui L, Wang M, Chen Y, Niu F, Liu J, Liu W,
Zhang Y.Biomechanical analysis of reduction malarplasty with L-shaped osteotomy. J Craniofac Surg.
2012;23:749–54.
15. Lee JS, Kang S, Kim YW. Endoscopically assisted
malarplasty: one incision and two dissection planes.
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003;111:461–7; discussion 468.
16. Onizuka T, Watanabe K, Takasu K, Keyama
A. Reduction malar plasty. Aesth Plast Surg.
1983;7:121–5.
17. Lee TS. The importance of shaving the zygomatic
process during reduction malarplasty. Int J Oral
Maxillofac Surg. 2016;45:1002–5.

Alloplastic Modication
oftheMidface
SanghoonPark
21
21.1 Pearls
1. Augmentation in the midface region can
enhance volume and balance in Asian facial
aesthetics, providing a more harmonious and
proportionate appearance. Augmentation in
the malar eminence, which is popular in
Western countries, is less common, reecting
the region’s unique cultural perspectives on
facial beauty.
2. The procedures commonly performed for
midface augmentation include paranasal and
suborbital augmentation, addressing specic
areas to achieve desired aesthetic outcomes.
3. Alloplastic materials used in these procedures
typically consist of implants such as silicone
or porous polyethylene. While autogenous fat
grafting is an alternative, it has limitations in
the amount of augmentation achievable and
unpredictability related to cell survival after
transplantation. The use of autogenous bone
grafts for midface augmentation is infrequent,
mainly due to issues with bone resorption
over time, which can compromise the longterm stability and effectiveness of the
augmentation.
S. Park (*)
Center for Facial Bone Surgery, Department of
Plastic Surgery, ID Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
e-mail: spark@idhospital.com
4. Screw xation of implants in midface augmentation is crucial, as it not only prevents
implant movement but also eliminates gaps
between the implant and the underlying skeletal structure. This technique ensures a snug
t of the implant, reducing the risk of postoperative complications like hematoma or
seroma formation and contributing to a more
predictable augmentation result.
21.2 Introduction
Midface hypoplasia, while less frequently a subject of patient complaints and consultations compared to a wide midface, still requires
comprehensive consideration, especially in the
context of Asian facial structures where increased
width relative to anteroposterior (AP) length is
common. When the ultimate goal is to achieve a
slimmer-looking yet volumetric face, augmentation of the midface can be a straightforward and
cost-effective approach. The midface is anatomically divided into several subunits, including the
cheek, paranasal area, and suborbital area, with
the latter two being the most commonly targeted
areas for augmentation [1, 2].
A simple and rapid method for midface augmentation is the use of free fat grafting with a
small cannula. For moderate augmentation, typically 10–20cc of centrifuged fat is required for
each side, taking into account the potential for
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2024
S. Park (ed.), Facial Bone Contouring Surgery, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-4992-8_21
207
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
