Outcomes and complications associated with malar onlays: literature review and case series of 119 implants

An innovative 3D hydroxyapatite patient-specific implant for maxillofacial bone reconstruction: A case series of 13 patients

The study aimed to evaluate and discuss the use of an innovative PSI made of porous hydroxyapatite, with interconnected porosity promoting osteointegration, called MyBone Custom® implant (MBCI), for maxillofacial bone reconstruction. A multicentric cohort of 13 patients underwent maxillofacial bone reconstruction surgery using MBCIs for various applications, from genioplasty to orbital floor reconstruction, including zygomatic and mandibular bone reconstruction, both for segmental defects and bone augmentation. The mean follow-up period was 9 months (1-22 months). No infections, displacements, or postoperative fractures were reported. Perioperative modifications of the MBCIs were possible when necessary. Additionally, surgeons reported significant time saved during surgery. For patients with postoperative CT scans, osteointegration signs were visible at the 6-month postoperative follow-up control, and continuous osteointegration was observed after 1 year. The advantages and disadvantages compared with current techniques used are discussed. MBCIs offer new bone reconstruction possibilities with long-term perspectives, while precluding the drawbacks of titanium and PEEK. The low level of postoperative complications associated with the high osteointegration potential of MBCIs paves the way to more extensive use of this new hydroxyapatite PSI in maxillofacial bone reconstruction.

Comparative Outcomes of Malar Implants Versus Fat Transfer to Cheeks Among Transfeminine Individuals Undergoing Malar Augmentation

BACKGROUND

Malar augmentation is a key procedure sought out by transfeminine individuals seeking to feminize their facial appearance. Different surgical techniques have been described in the literature including fat transfer to the cheeks and malar implant placement. Because of the paucity of information in the literature, there is no consensus on best practices for this procedure. The objective of our study is to determine the effectiveness and safety of malar implants as compared with fat transfer to the cheeks in transfeminine individuals.

METHODS

We examined all patients with the diagnosis of gender dysphoria that were referred to the senior author seeking consultation for feminizing facial procedures between June 2017 and August 2022. Patients who underwent fat transfer to the cheeks or malar implant placement were included in our study. We reviewed the electronic medical record of each patient, and we retrieved and analyzed data regarding demographics, medical and surgical history, operative dictations, clinic notes, and postoperative follow-up. Univariate analysis was used to assess for differences in postoperative complications between these 2 groups.

RESULTS

We identified 231 patients underwent feminizing facial gender affirming surgery, with 152 patients receiving malar augmentation through malar implants or fat grafting. One hundred twenty-nine patients (84.9%) underwent malar implant placement and 23 (15.1%) underwent fat grafting to the cheeks. The mean follow-up time was 3.6 ± 2.7 months. Patient satisfaction was greater in the malar implant group (126/129, 97.7%) compared with the fat transfer group (20/23, 87%, P < 0.045). Two patients who received implants (1.8%) experienced postoperative complications. No patient undergoing fat transfer experiences similar adverse outcomes. Nevertheless, the difference was not statistically significant (P = 1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the contention that malar implants are a safe alternative for malar augmentation among transfeminine individuals. While autologous fat transfer to the cheek is an indispensable option in patients requiring minor malar enhancement, malar implants offer a more permanent option with a better aesthetic outcome in patients requiring major malar enhancement. To minimize postoperative complications, surgeons should emphasize patient compliance with postoperative directions.

Alloplastic malar implants in aesthetic facial surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To examine the recent literature on aesthetic alloplastic malar implants.

RECENT FINDINGS

Alloplastic implantation is heavily favored in the oromaxillofacial literature. Recent articles have examined porous polyethylene and silicone implantation. Overall patient satisfaction is high and complications are low. Outcomes are likely comparable with alternative modalities to rejuvenate the face in the appropriate hands.

SUMMARY

Alloplastic implantation continues to be a reliable tool for malar augmentation.