Implant-Based Chin Augmentation Vs Osseous Genioplasty: A Systematic Review of Indications and Outcomes.

Osseous genioplasty (OG) and implant-based chin augmentation are 2 primary approaches for correcting microgenia. A comprehensive synthesis comparing their outcomes, safety profiles, and patient satisfaction is lacking. In this study, the authors aim to assess the safety and outcome profile of implant-based chin augmentation and OG. A systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A comprehensive search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Google Scholar was performed in November 2024, utilizing keywords related to genioplasty, chin implants, and specific implant materials. Inclusion criteria required studies to provide original data on isolated procedures performed at a single institution, ensuring consistency in perioperative management. The authors included 7 single-center studies involving 1126 patients with microgenia (740 underwent OG; 386 received implants). Follow-up durations ranged from 6 months to 6 years. Implant materials included Medpor, silicone, Proplast, and PEEK. Patient satisfaction was high across both cohorts, with a trend toward higher satisfaction rates in the OG group. Complication profiles differed: implants had higher infection rates (up to 23.8%) and dehiscence, whereas OG was associated with transient neurosensory changes (up to 100%), occasionally persisting in 7.4% to 12.5% of patients. Relapse rates were similar but slightly higher for OG (2.63%-27.21%). OG was noted to provide greater soft-tissue predictability (85% bony to soft-tissue translation) than implants (66%). Both procedures are effective for managing microgenia, with distinct strengths and risks. Future studies should explore long-term outcomes and assess custom-fabricated implants to enhance fit, contour, and patient satisfaction. Tailored approaches based on individual patient needs remain critical.

Level of evidence 3 therapeutic: