Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 28, 2026
03:47
Enhancement of Facial Rejuvenation Through a Combination of 1565 nm Non-Ablative Fractional Laser with 30% Supramolecular Salicylic Acid
Published on: September 27, 2024
SMAS rhytidectomy versus deep plane rhytidectomy: an objective comparison
1University of California, Los Angeles, Division of Head and Neck Surgery, USA.
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
|September 4, 1998
Summary
Deep plane rhytidectomy is more effective than superficial musculoaponeurotic system (SMAS) rhytidectomy for facelifts. Patients needed fewer secondary tuck procedures after deep plane lifts, indicating superior aesthetic outcomes.
Area of Science:
- Plastic Surgery
- Aesthetic Surgery
- Facial Rejuvenation Techniques
Background:
- Facelift techniques lack a universally agreed-upon standard for effectiveness.
- Subjectivity in aesthetics, surgeon variability, and patient-specific factors complicate objective comparisons.
Purpose of the Study:
- To objectively compare the efficacy of deep plane rhytidectomy versus superficial musculoaponeurotic system (SMAS) rhytidectomy.
- To evaluate the rate of secondary tuck procedures required after each facelift technique.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective chart review of patients undergoing rhytidectomy between 1990 and 1997.
- Comparison of tuck procedure rates between SMAS and deep plane facelift groups.
Main Results:
- The overall tuck rate was 7.5%.
- Tuck rate after SMAS rhytidectomy was 11.4%, compared to 3.3% after deep plane rhytidectomy.
- A statistically significant difference (p=0.0001) showed a 71% lower need for tuck procedures after deep plane lifts.
Conclusions:
- Deep plane rhytidectomy appears to be a more effective facelift technique than SMAS rhytidectomy.
- The reduced need for tuck procedures suggests superior aesthetic results and patient satisfaction with the deep plane method.
