Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Search research articles

Related Experiment Videos

Nasal base, maxillary, and infraorbital implants--alloplastic.

¹Clínica Mirasierra de Cirugía Plástica-Estética, Madrid, Spain.

Clinics in Plastic Surgery

|January 1, 1991

Summary

Facial skeletal contouring uses ostectomies or augmentation with implants for balanced facial aesthetics. Silicone implants are preferred for malar, chin, and mandibular augmentation due to stability and biocompatibility.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Foreword.

Aesthetic plastic surgery·2013

Same author

Mammaplasty: The dermal brassière technique.

Aesthetic plastic surgery·2013

Same author

Dr. Vazquez Añón's last lesson.

Aesthetic plastic surgery·2013

Same author

Aesthetic plastic correction of incomplete testicular feminization.

Aesthetic plastic surgery·2013

Same author

Circumareolar dermo-glandular plication: a new concept for correction of breast ptosis.

Aesthetic plastic surgery·2001

Same author

Functional and aesthetic results in hypospadias repair with Hinderer's techniques.

Aesthetic plastic surgery·2000

Area of Science:

Plastic Surgery
Craniofacial Surgery
Aesthetic Surgery

Background:

Facial skeletal contouring aims to balance facial aesthetics through bone modification or augmentation.
Craniomaxillofacial surgeries address major malformations and malocclusions.
Material selection for augmentation impacts surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction.

Purpose of the Study:

To review preferred materials and techniques for facial skeletal contouring.
To discuss the advantages of silicone implants over autologous bone grafts for specific augmentations.
To highlight the application of premaxillary implants for midface augmentation.

Main Methods:

Review of surgical techniques for facial skeletal contouring.
Comparison of cartilage, synthetic materials, silicone implants, and autologous bone grafts.
Discussion of subperiosteal implant insertion and specific implant types (malar, chin, mandibular angle, premaxillary).

Main Results:

Cartilage is preferred for nasal dorsum/tip augmentation.
Silicone implants are favored for malar, chin, and mandibular angle augmentation due to stability, shape retention, and biocompatibility.
Premaxillary implants effectively correct concave midfacial profiles in various patient populations.

Conclusions:

Silicone implants offer advantages over autologous bone grafts for facial augmentation.
Subperiosteal insertion provides stability for facial implants.
Specific implants are indicated for targeted correction of facial skeletal deficiencies.

Related Experiment Videos