Anatomy of the Superior and Inferior Labial Arteries Revised: An Ultrasound Investigation and Implication for Lip Volumization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lips are considered a key element of facial attractiveness due to their central position in the face and their elemental role in verbal and nonverbal communication. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to provide clinically relevant information on the 3-dimensional pathway of the superior and inferior labial arteries within the lips to increase safety during labial soft tissue filler injections. METHODS: The study enrolled 41 healthy volunteers with a mean age of 26.17 ± 9.6 years and a mean body mass index of 23.09 ± 2.3 kg/m2. Ultrasound imaging was performed at 6 different locations. The position of the labial arteries within the lips, depth of the arteries, cranio-caudal location of each artery in relation to the vermilion border, and diameter of the superior/inferior labial arteries were recorded. RESULTS: The most frequent location of both the superior and inferior labial arteries was the submucosal plane (58.5%) followed by intramuscular (36.2%) and subcutaneous (5.3%) planes. The depth of the superior labial artery in the upper lip was 5.6 ± 0.13 mm, whereas the depth of the inferior labial artery in the lower lip was 5.2 ± 0.14 mm. Both arteries were more frequently located within the red lip: upper lip (83% vs 18.7%) and lower lip (86.2% vs 13.8%). In the midline, the artery coursed within the red lip in all investigated volunteers. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically, results of this study favor a superficial injection plane for lip volumization procedures. A perpendicular approach to the lip (coming from the cutaneous lip) might increase safety because the artery is located most frequently within the red lip.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".