Cephalometric Soft Tissue Evaluation in Facial Rejuvenation

  • Mark L. Zukowski
  • Oscar M. Ramirez


The introduction of new surgical techniques or technology is always viewed with suspicion. As residents, we are familiar with the wisdom imparted by our professors that states, “One never wants to be the first to apply new technologies or procedures but certainly not the last.” One simply has to look at the experiences of our colleagues in gynecology, general surgery, and orthopedics to realize that endoscopy is a technology that has been utilized with incredible success in minimizing the scars and morbidity of open procedures. Criticisms abound as to the sometimes qualitative and subjective methods that plastic surgeons use in attempting to quantitate changes that result with various aesthetic surgical techniques.1 It is incumbent upon us therefore to place special emphasis on analysis of endoscopic assisted techniques.


Cephalometric Analysis Nasolabial Fold Facial Rejuvenation Deep Plane Soft Tissue Profile 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Dellon LA. What is missing in journal articles on aesthetic techniques?—Science. Plast Reconstr Surg 1994;93: 656–660.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Isse NG. Endoscopic facial rejuvenation: Endoforehead, the functional lift. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1994;18:21–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yousif JN, Gosain A, Sanger JR, et al. The nasolabial fold: A photogrammetic analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 1994;93: 70–77.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Farkas, LG, Bryson W, Klotz J. Is photogrammetry of the face reliable? Plast Reconstr Surg 1980;66:346–355.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berkowitz S, Cuzzi J. Biostereo analysis of surgically corrected abnormal faces. Am J Orthod 1977;72:526–538.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Konstiantos KA, O’Reilly T. The validity of the prediction of soft tissue profile changes after LeFort I osteotomy using the dentofacial planner (Computer Software). Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1994;105:241–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hayes RJ, Sarver DM, Jacobson A. The quantification of soft tissue cervicomental changes after mandibular advancement surgery. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1994;105:383–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Savara BS, Miller SH, Demuth RJ, et al. Biostereometrics and computer graphics for patients with craniofacial malformations: Diagnosis and treatment planning. Plast Reconstr Surg 1985;75:495–501.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Arridge S, Moss JP, Linney AD, et al. Three dimensional digitization of the face and skull. J Maxillofac Surg 1985;13:136–143.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moss JP, Fright WR, James DR. A three-dimensional soft tissue analysis of fifteen patients with class II, division 1 malocclusions after bimaxillary surgery. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1994;105:430–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kinnebrew MC, Hoffman DR, Carlton DM. Projecting the soft-tissue outcome of surgical and orthodontic manipulation of the maxillofacial skeleton. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1983;84:508–519.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Marsh JL, Vannier MW. The “third” dimension in craniofacial surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 1983;71:759–767.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Marsh JL, Vannier MW, Stevens WG, et al. Computerized imaging for soft tissue and osseous reconstruction in the head and neck. Clin Plast Surg 1985;12:279–291.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zide B, Grayson B, McCarthy JG. Cephalometric analysis: Part I. Plast Reconstr Surg 1981;68:816–823.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zide B, Grayson B, McCarthy JG. Cephalometric analysis and preoperative planning: Part II. Plast Reconstr Surg 1981;68:961–972.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zide B, Grayson B, McCarthy JG. Cephalometric analysis for mandibular surgery: Part III. Plast Reconstr Surg 1982;69:155–164.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cutting C, Bookstein FK, Grayson B, et al. Three-dimensional computer-assisted design of craniofacial surgical procedures: Optimization and interaction with cephalometric and CT-based models. Plast Reconstr Surg 1985;86:877–885.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Butow KW. A lateral photometric analysis for aesthetic orthognathic treatment. J Maxillofac Surg 1984;12:201–207.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lundstrom A, Paulin G, Forsber C. Quantitative evaluation of the soft tissue profile in the planning of orthognathic surgery. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg 1993,8:74–86.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Farkas LG, Kolar JC. Anthropometrics and art in the aesthetics of women’s faces. Clin Plast Surg 1987;14: 599–616.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kobayashi T, Ueda K, Homma K, et al. Three-dimen-sional analysis of facial morphology before and after or¬thognathic surgery. J Cranio Maxillofac Surg 1990;18: 68–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Leonard MS, Johnson GW, Starfield AM, et al. Computer graphics in facial morphology analysis. Int J Oral Surg 1981;10(Suppll):273–282. PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Farkas LG, Kolar JC. Anthropometric guidelines in cranio-orbital surgery. Clin Plast Surg 1987;14:631–637.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Furnas DW. Precision nasal profileplasty with life-sized slide projections, calibrated xerograms, and intraoperative measurements. Clin Plast Surg 1987;14:631–637.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Guyuron B. Precision rhinoplasty. Part I: The role of life-size photographs and soft-tissue cephalometric analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 1987;14:489-499. Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Furnas DW. Anthropometric landmarks for precision planning in rhytidectomy. Clin Plast Surg 1987;14: 639–661.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gonzalez-Uloa M. The aging face: Elimination of wrinkles and other problems. In Gonzalez-Uloa M, Ed. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Vol. 1. St. Louis: Mosby, 1988; 13–30.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gonzalez-Uloa M, Simonin F, Flores E. The anatomy of the aging Face. In Hueston JT, Ed. Transactions of the 5th M.L. Zukowski and O.M. Ramirez International Congress of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Melbourne, Australia, Butterworths, 1971: 1059–1066.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Horibe EK, Horibe K, Yamaguchi CT. Pronounced nasolabial fold: A surgical correction. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1989;13:99–105.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    McKinney P, Cook JQ. Liposuction and the treatment of nasolabial folds. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1989;13:167–172.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Millard DR Jr, Yuan RT, Devine JW Jr. A challenge to the undefeated nasolabial folds. Plast Reconstr Surg 1987; 80:37–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Barton FE. Rhytidectomy and the nasolabial fold. Plast Reconstr Surg 1991;90:601–607.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Riefkohl R. The nasolabial fold lift. Ann Plast Surg 1985; 15:1–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rafaty MF, Cochran J. A technique of nasolabioplasty. Laryngoscope 1978;88:95–99.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rubin LR, Mishriki Y, Lee G. Anatomy of the nasolabial fold: The keystone of the smiling mechanism. Plast Reconstr Surg 1989;83:1–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark L. Zukowski
  • Oscar M. Ramirez

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations