DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Demographic review of aesthetic surgery for patients with facial palsy

  • Min Young Lee (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Yun Jung Kim (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Young Seok Kim (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Tai Suk Roh (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • In Sik Yun (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2023.11.06
  • Accepted : 2024.02.12
  • Published : 2024.02.20

Abstract

Background: This study analyzed the demographic characteristics of patients with facial palsy who were treated using either dynamic or static procedures. This study aimed to compare the frequency of procedure implementation and age distribution between the two groups. Methods: This study retrospectively analyzed the medical records of patients treated for facial palsy at a single institution from 2014 to 2022. Among cases included in our study, dynamic procedures involved cross-facial nerve graft and latissimus dorsi or gracilis muscle flap transfer. Static procedures included gold weight insertion, canthopexy, browlift, and thread lift/static slings. Results: Among the 31 patients included in our study, eight (25.8%) incorporated dynamic techniques, and the average age of patients was 44.75 years (range, 24-68 years) with a male to female ratio of 1:4. The remaining 23 patients (74.2%) underwent a static procedure, of which the average age was 59.17 years (range, 23-81 years) which was statistically significantly higher than the average age of 44.75 of dynamic patients (p= 0.013). Regarding the timing of treatment after diagnosis, no patient underwent dynamic procedures more than 20 years after initial diagnosis. A greater diversity in the timing of treatment was observed in the static group. All patients who underwent dynamic procedures were treated using static procedures during the study period. Conclusion: Because aesthetics-based static techniques are typically quick outpatient procedures that can be performed under local anesthesia, our study shows that these are often preferred treatments for all age groups, especially for debilitated or older patients. Further research is required to investigate the long-term functional outcomes of these surgical techniques in a wider population of patients.

Keywords

References

  1. Melvin TA, Limb CJ. Overview of facial paralysis: current concepts. Facial Plast Surg 2008;24:155-63.  https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1075830
  2. Park H, Jeong SS, Oh TS. Masseter nerve-based facial palsy reconstruction. Arch Craniofac Surg 2020;21:337-44.  https://doi.org/10.7181/acfs.2020.00682
  3. Koo WY, Park SO, Ahn HC, Ryu SR. Facial reanimation using the hypoglossal nerve and ansa cervicalis: a short-term retrospective analysis of surgical outcomes. Arch Craniofac Surg 2021;22:303-9.  https://doi.org/10.7181/acfs.2021.00444
  4. Nadol JB, McKenna MJ. Surgery of the ear and temporal bone. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005. 
  5. Garcia RM, Hadlock TA, Klebuc MJ, Simpson RL, Zenn MR, Marcus JR. Contemporary solutions for the treatment of facial nerve paralysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015;135:1025e-1046e.  https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000001273
  6. Harris BN, Tollefson TT. Facial reanimation: evolving from static procedures to free tissue transfer in head and neck surgery. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2015;23:399-406.  https://doi.org/10.1097/MOO.0000000000000193
  7. Mehta RP. Surgical treatment of facial paralysis. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol 2009;2:1-5.  https://doi.org/10.3342/ceo.2009.2.1.1
  8. Hohman MH, Hadlock TA. Etiology, diagnosis, and management of facial palsy: 2000 patients at a facial nerve center. Laryngoscope 2014;124:E283-93.  https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.24542
  9. Bergeron CM, Moe KS. The evaluation and treatment of upper eyelid paralysis. Facial Plast Surg 2008;24:220-30.  https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1075838
  10. Douglas RS, Gausas RE. A systematic comprehensive approach to management of irreversible facial paralysis. Facial Plast Surg 2003;19:107-12.  https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2003-39135
  11. Morley SE. 'Are dynamic procedures superior to static in treating the paralytic eyelid in facial paralysis?'. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2023;77:8-17.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2022.10.037
  12. Iseli TA, Harris G, Dean NR, Iseli CE, Rosenthal EL. Outcomes of static and dynamic facial nerve repair in head and neck cancer. Laryngoscope 2010;120:478-83.  https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.20789
  13. Liu YM, Sherris DA. Static procedures for the management of the midface and lower face. Facial Plast Surg 2008;24:211-5.  https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1075836
  14. Hadlock TA, Greenfield LJ, Wernick-Robinson M, Cheney ML. Multimodality approach to management of the paralyzed face. Laryngoscope 2006;116:1385-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlg.0000225980.38147.c6