{"title":"双眼皮手术中连续缝合与两点埋线长期稳定性的比较:1000例4年回顾性队列研究。","authors":"Kohki Okumura, Takahiko Tamura, Taichi Tamura, Yusuke Funakoshi, Hiroo Teranishi","doi":"10.1007/s00266-025-05024-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Double eyelid surgery is a minimally invasive cosmetic procedure characterized by a short downtime. Continuous and two-point methods are widely utilized buried suture techniques; however, direct comparisons of their long-term stabilities are scarce. This study aimed to compare the long-term stability and reoperation rates between the continuous and two-point buried suture methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed reoperation rates, time to reoperation, and reasons for reoperation in 1,000 cases (500 cases for each technique). Multivariate analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox proportional hazards models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Reoperation rates were significantly lower with the continuous method (13.4%) than with the two-point method (26.2%; p < 0.001). Cox model analysis revealed that the two-point method significantly increased the risk of reoperation (hazard ratio = 2.1, p < 0.001). The primary reason for reoperation was suture loosening (81.87%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The continuous method resulted in lower reoperation rates and superior long-term stability. These findings provide evidence-based guidance for selecting surgical techniques for double eyelid surgery.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence iii: </strong>This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .</p>","PeriodicalId":7609,"journal":{"name":"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Long-Term Stability Between Continuous and Two-Point Buried Suture Methods in Double Eyelid Surgery: A 4-Year Retrospective Cohort Study of 1000 Cases.\",\"authors\":\"Kohki Okumura, Takahiko Tamura, Taichi Tamura, Yusuke Funakoshi, Hiroo Teranishi\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00266-025-05024-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Double eyelid surgery is a minimally invasive cosmetic procedure characterized by a short downtime. Continuous and two-point methods are widely utilized buried suture techniques; however, direct comparisons of their long-term stabilities are scarce. This study aimed to compare the long-term stability and reoperation rates between the continuous and two-point buried suture methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed reoperation rates, time to reoperation, and reasons for reoperation in 1,000 cases (500 cases for each technique). Multivariate analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox proportional hazards models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Reoperation rates were significantly lower with the continuous method (13.4%) than with the two-point method (26.2%; p < 0.001). Cox model analysis revealed that the two-point method significantly increased the risk of reoperation (hazard ratio = 2.1, p < 0.001). The primary reason for reoperation was suture loosening (81.87%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The continuous method resulted in lower reoperation rates and superior long-term stability. These findings provide evidence-based guidance for selecting surgical techniques for double eyelid surgery.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence iii: </strong>This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7609,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-025-05024-2\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-025-05024-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of Long-Term Stability Between Continuous and Two-Point Buried Suture Methods in Double Eyelid Surgery: A 4-Year Retrospective Cohort Study of 1000 Cases.
Background: Double eyelid surgery is a minimally invasive cosmetic procedure characterized by a short downtime. Continuous and two-point methods are widely utilized buried suture techniques; however, direct comparisons of their long-term stabilities are scarce. This study aimed to compare the long-term stability and reoperation rates between the continuous and two-point buried suture methods.
Methods: We analyzed reoperation rates, time to reoperation, and reasons for reoperation in 1,000 cases (500 cases for each technique). Multivariate analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox proportional hazards models.
Results: Reoperation rates were significantly lower with the continuous method (13.4%) than with the two-point method (26.2%; p < 0.001). Cox model analysis revealed that the two-point method significantly increased the risk of reoperation (hazard ratio = 2.1, p < 0.001). The primary reason for reoperation was suture loosening (81.87%).
Conclusion: The continuous method resulted in lower reoperation rates and superior long-term stability. These findings provide evidence-based guidance for selecting surgical techniques for double eyelid surgery.
Level of evidence iii: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
期刊介绍:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery is a publication of the International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery and the official journal of the European Association of Societies of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (EASAPS), Società Italiana di Chirurgia Plastica Ricostruttiva ed Estetica (SICPRE), Vereinigung der Deutschen Aesthetisch Plastischen Chirurgen (VDAPC), the Romanian Aesthetic Surgery Society (RASS), Asociación Española de Cirugía Estética Plástica (AECEP), La Sociedad Argentina de Cirugía Plástica, Estética y Reparadora (SACPER), the Rhinoplasty Society of Europe (RSE), the Iranian Society of Plastic and Aesthetic Surgeons (ISPAS), the Singapore Association of Plastic Surgeons (SAPS), the Australasian Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (ASAPS), the Egyptian Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (ESPRS), and the Sociedad Chilena de Cirugía Plástica, Reconstructiva y Estética (SCCP).
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery provides a forum for original articles advancing the art of aesthetic plastic surgery. Many describe surgical craftsmanship; others deal with complications in surgical procedures and methods by which to treat or avoid them. Coverage includes "second thoughts" on established techniques, which might be abandoned, modified, or improved. Also included are case histories; improvements in surgical instruments, pharmaceuticals, and operating room equipment; and discussions of problems such as the role of psychosocial factors in the doctor-patient and the patient-public interrelationships.
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery is covered in Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, SciSearch, Research Alert, Index Medicus-Medline, and Excerpta Medica/Embase.