MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789838569 · doi:10.1093/asj/sjy062

Modified Composite-Flap Facelift Combined With Finger-Assisted Malar Elevation (FAME): A Cadaver Study

2018· article· en· W2789838569 on OpenAlexaff
Özcan Çakmak, Berke Özüçer, Mustafa Aktekin, Fazıl Emre Özkurt, Rami Al‐Salman, İsmet Emrah Emre

Bibliographic record

VenueAesthetic Surgery Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCadaverRhytidoplastySurgeryAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Inadequate release of retaining ligaments during facelift surgery may lead to an unnatural appearance. However, most facelift surgeons are hesitant in transecting these ligaments to avoid possible injury to facial subbranches. OBJECTIVES: In the authors' surgical practice for modified composite flap rhytidectomy, the authors employed the finger-assisted malar elevation (FAME) technique in order to enable safe release of the zygomatic cutaneous ligaments through the prezygomatic space under direct vision. The aim was to evaluate the anatomical basis and safety measures of this technique through a cadaveric dissection study. METHODS: Modified composite-flap facelift with the FAME technique was carried out in 22 fresh cadaver hemi-faces. All facial nerve subbranches were dissected thoroughly to assess for any evidence of injury during facelift, and to evaluate the safety of the operation. The relations among the facial nerve, zygomatic cutaneous and masseteric ligaments, orbicularis oculi muscle, and malar fat pad were investigated. RESULTS: Finger dissection of the prezygomatic space allows safe release of the zygomatic cutaneous ligaments as well as adequate entry to a proper surgical plane above the zygomatici muscles under direct vision, while leaving the malar fat pad and overlying structures attached to the skin without the need of a transblepharoplasty approach. CONCLUSIONS: This study by the authors shows that a modified composite-flap facelift with FAME technique is a safe procedure that allows adequate and effective repositioning of an en-bloc composite flap that produces balanced and harmonious rejuvenation of the midface and lower face without the need of a separate midface lift.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score0.870

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAesthetic Surgery JournalSame topicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207