Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
4.6
2.9
Journals
Medicina
Special Issues
Advances in Facial Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery
share announcement

Advances in Facial Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery

A special issue of Medicina (ISSN 1648-9144). This special issue belongs to the section "Surgery".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 30 September 2026 | Viewed by 1975

Editors

Dr. Gennaro D'Orsi

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
PhD School of Applied Medical-Surgical Sciences, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Via Montpellier 1, 00133 Rome, Italy
Interests: plastic and reconstructive surgery; microsurgery; aesthetic surgery; fat grafting
Dr. Benedetto Longo

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgical Science, Tor Vergata University of Rome, Via Montpellier 1, 00133 Rome, Italy
Interests: plastic surgery; reconstructive surgery
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Facial plastic and aesthetic surgery is undergoing a period of rapid evolution driven by technological innovation, refined surgical techniques, and a deeper understanding of facial anatomy, aging processes, and patient-centered outcomes. Globally, the field is responding to increasing patient expectations for natural, durable, and individualized results, while simultaneously addressing challenges related to safety, long-term efficacy, ethical practice, and evidence-based decision-making.

This Special Issue aims to present and disseminate the most recent advances related to facial plastic and aesthetic surgery, with a focus on innovative surgical and non-surgical techniques, technological developments, outcome analysis, and evidence-based clinical practice. We welcome original research articles, systematic reviews, narrative reviews, technical notes, and high-quality clinical studies addressing both reconstructive and aesthetic aspects of facial surgery, with relevance to contemporary practice and future developments in the field.

Topics of interest for publication include, but are not limited to, the following:

  • Aesthetic surgery of the face;
  • The use of AI in the aesthetic and reconstructive surgery of the face;
  • Face and oral reconstruction.

Dr. Gennaro D'Orsi
Dr. Benedetto Longo
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 250 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for assessment.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-anonymized peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Medicina is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2200 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • face
  • oral reconstruction
  • aesthetic surgery
  • microsurgery
  • facial surgery

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • Reprint: MDPI Books provides the opportunity to republish successful Special Issues in book format, both online and in print.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (3 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Other

11 pages, 1437 KB  
Article
The Effect of Nostril Retainer Use on Nostril Aperture Symmetry After Primary Aesthetic Rhinoplasty
by Nagihan Gülhan Yaşar, Ağah Yeniçeri, Burak Hazır, Ayşe Seçil Kayalı Dinç and Melih Çayönü
Medicina 2026, 62(8), 1436; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina62081436 - 24 Jul 2026
Viewed by 310
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Nostril aperture symmetry is an important component of nasal base aesthetics after rhinoplasty. However, nostril retainers are commonly used in reconstructive nasal surgery; their role after primary aesthetic rhinoplasty remains insufficiently defined. This study aimed to evaluate the effect [...] Read more.
Background and Objectives: Nostril aperture symmetry is an important component of nasal base aesthetics after rhinoplasty. However, nostril retainers are commonly used in reconstructive nasal surgery; their role after primary aesthetic rhinoplasty remains insufficiently defined. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of early postoperative nostril retainer use on nostril aperture symmetry after primary rhinoplasty using ImageJ-based morphometric measurements. Materials and Methods: This prospective, non-randomized comparative observational study included 52 patients who underwent primary open structural rhinoplasty. A total of 26 patients used a nostril retainer postoperatively, whereas 26 patients did not. Standardized basal-view photographs were obtained at postoperative week 1 and postoperative month 3. Right and left nostril aperture area, height, and width were measured using ImageJ software version 1.54 g after individual calibration with a millimetric ruler. Changes in symmetry indices from week 1 to month 3 were compared between groups. Results: Baseline week-1 symmetry indices were comparable between groups. The increase in area symmetry index from postoperative week 1 to month 3 was significantly greater in the nostril retainer group than in the control group (3.08 ± 4.99 vs. −1.00 ± 4.86; mean difference: 4.08; 95% CI: 1.34–6.82; p = 0.004). Changes in height symmetry index and width symmetry index did not differ significantly between groups. Conclusions: Early postoperative nostril retainer use was associated with improved nostril area symmetry after primary rhinoplasty. This benefit may be better reflected in global area-based symmetry than in isolated height or width measurements. Nostril retainers may represent a simple, noninvasive adjunct for selected patients at risk of early postoperative nostril asymmetry. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Facial Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 10322 KB  
Article
Temporal Stability of Nasal Tip Rotation and Projection Following Rhinoplasty Using a Novel Integrated Pentagonal Tip Support Technique
by Şamil Şahin, Burak Erkmen, Mehmet Nuri Elgörmüş, Yeşim Esen Yiğit Koçer, Yaşar Kemal Duymaz and İbrahim Engin Çekin
Medicina 2026, 62(6), 1060; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina62061060 - 30 May 2026
Viewed by 402
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Achieving long-term stability of nasal tip rotation and projection remains a challenge in rhinoplasty because of postoperative remodeling processes such as edema resolution, soft tissue redraping, and scar maturation. This study evaluated the temporal changes in nasal tip rotation and [...] Read more.
Background and Objectives: Achieving long-term stability of nasal tip rotation and projection remains a challenge in rhinoplasty because of postoperative remodeling processes such as edema resolution, soft tissue redraping, and scar maturation. This study evaluated the temporal changes in nasal tip rotation and projection following rhinoplasty using the Pentagonal Tip Support Technique (PTST). Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients undergoing primary rhinoplasty using PTST, with standardized photographic assessments performed intraoperatively and at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Nasal tip rotation and projection were quantified using the nasolabial angle and Goode ratio, respectively, and temporal changes were analyzed across postoperative intervals. Results: Both parameters demonstrated statistically significant reductions over time. However, the majority of changes occurred within the first 6 months, whereas later follow-up intervals demonstrated smaller changes and a reduced rate of change. Similar temporal patterns were observed across different skin types, and skin type was not significantly associated with late postoperative changes in rotation or projection. Conclusions: The findings of the present study suggest that PTST is associated with a temporal pattern characterized by greater early postoperative changes followed by smaller interval changes during later follow-up. These findings may reflect postoperative healing dynamics and structural support behavior following rhinoplasty. However, further prospective comparative studies are needed to better define the clinical behavior of PTST over extended follow-up periods relative to established structural rhinoplasty techniques. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Facial Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Other

Jump to: Research

14 pages, 4470 KB  
Systematic Review
Facial Gender-Confirmation Surgery: A Systematic Mapping Review of Surgical Growth and Outcome Gaps
by Gustavo Sáenz-Ravello, Paula Carrasco García, Shane D. Morrison, Alberto Inzulza Galdames, Thais Calderon, Elie M. Ferneini and Elda L. Fisher
Medicina 2026, 62(7), 1303; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina62071303 - 6 Jul 2026
Viewed by 388
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Facial gender-confirmation surgery (FGCS) has expanded rapidly but remains uneven across procedures, specialties, and outcome domains, limiting clinically useful interpretation for surgeons. The aim is to characterize how FGCS evidence has developed and to identify gaps relevant to surgical [...] Read more.
Background and Objectives: Facial gender-confirmation surgery (FGCS) has expanded rapidly but remains uneven across procedures, specialties, and outcome domains, limiting clinically useful interpretation for surgeons. The aim is to characterize how FGCS evidence has developed and to identify gaps relevant to surgical reporting and patient-centered outcome evaluation. Materials and Methods: Systematic searches were conducted without date restriction in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, LiLACS, and EBSCOhost through June 2025. Eligible studies included original clinical research, systematic reviews (SR), technical notes, and economic evaluations. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data. PROSPERO: CRD420251041192. Results: Among 338 included studies, the literature was concentrated on feminization procedures (78%) and hard-tissue interventions (51%). Outcome reporting was dominated by surgical technique (36%) and complications (29%); patient-centered domains were less represented, including satisfaction (25%), preferences (7%), recovery (2%), and ethics (3%). Masculinization and soft-tissue procedures were less frequently studied. Methodological quality of the 36 included SRs was predominantly critically low (72%) or low (28%). Conclusions: Procedural reporting in FGCS has developed asymmetrically relative to standardized patient-centered outcome measurement, a pattern consistent with the formative stages observed in other surgical fields. For surgeons, this limits comparability across procedures and weakens the evidence base for counseling, multidisciplinary planning, and postoperative evaluation. Future research should prioritize more consistent and validated patient-reporting frameworks. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Facial Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-3
Back to TopTop