Current Practices and Trends in Midface Rejuvenation

Abstract

Background Cosmetic approaches to midface aging are complex and vary in their treatment methodology. The nature of cosmetic surgery limits clinical trial data, forcing surgeons to rely on small studies and professional preferences when choosing an approach. Our study aimed to quantitatively assess national trends in midface rejuvenation practices. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study consisting of a survey administered through the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and the American Society of Plastic Surgeons listservs. To evaluate trends, techniques were grouped into 2 categories: minimally invasive (injectable fillers, fat transfer, fat repositioning) or invasive (deep plane facelift, subperiosteal lift, malar/cheek alloplastic implant, bone grafting/bone advancement). Results Two hundred thirty-two survey responses were received. Of the total respondents, 46.52% were certified by the American Board of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, and 48.26% were certified by the American Board of Plastic Surgery. Minimally invasive techniques were far more preferred (66.67%) over invasive (33.33%) techniques, with injectable fillers as the most common technique (34.88%), followed by fat transfer (20.93%). Deep plane facelift was preferred over subperiosteal lift (18.60% vs 7.91%, respectively). Surgeons board certified by the American Board of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery were more inclined to perform invasive techniques over those board certified by the American Board of Plastic Surgery (P = 0.0427). Conclusion This study quantitatively assessed national trends in cosmetic approaches to midface aging. Our data suggest that trends among surgeons across the United States have shifted toward favoring minimally invasive techniques over more invasive approaches.