Comparative analysis reveals distinct trade-offs between SMAS and deep plane facelifting, suggesting the need for personalized surgical approaches based on patient anatomy.
The authors analyzed contemporary facelift techniques with a focus on SMAS and Deep Plane approaches, including their anatomical and technical characteristics, indications, effectiveness and safety. Both techniques are followed by high patient satisfaction. Deep Plane facelift allows for better and longer-lasting effects due to mobilization of deeper anatomical structures. However, it is associated with higher rate of complications. In contrast, SMAS techniques are characterized by lower invasiveness and better safety profile, although they offer more limited correction of the midface. Facelift technique should be based on individual anatomical characteristics, age-related changes and patient needs. No universal "gold standard" highlights the role of a personalized approach in aesthetic surgery, as well as the need for further prospective studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ермощенкова et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: