Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Authors’ Reply
BRIDGING THE GAP
BRIEF COMMUNICATION
BRIEF REPORT
Case Report
Case Reports
Case Series
CME
CME ARTICLE
CME articles - Practice points
COMMENTARY
CONFERENCE REPORT
CONTROVERSY
Correspondence
Correspondences
CUTANEOUS PATHOLOGY
DRUG REVIEW
E-CHAT
Editorial
EDITORIAL COMMENTARY
ERRATUM
ETHICAL HOTLINE
ETHICS
Field: Evolution of dermatologic surgergy
FOCUS
FROM THE ARCHIVES OF INDIAN JOURNAL OF DERMATO SURGERY
From the Editor's Desk
FROM THE LITERATURE
GUEST EDITORIAL
Guidelines
Images in Clinical Practice
Images in Dermatosurgery
INNOVATION
Innovations
INVITED COMMENTARY
JCAS Symposium
LETTER
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
LETTERS
Message from the President
NEW HORIZON
Original Article
Practice Point
Practice Points
PRESIDENTIAL SPEECH
QUIZ
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Resident’s Page
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
SHORT COMMUNICATION
Spot the Diagnosis [Quiz]
STUDY
SURGICAL PEARL
SYMPOSIUM
Symposium—Lasers
Symposium: Hair in Dermatology
Symposium: Lasers Review Article
View Point
VIEWPOINT
VIEWPOINTS
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Authors’ Reply
BRIDGING THE GAP
BRIEF COMMUNICATION
BRIEF REPORT
Case Report
Case Reports
Case Series
CME
CME ARTICLE
CME articles - Practice points
COMMENTARY
CONFERENCE REPORT
CONTROVERSY
Correspondence
Correspondences
CUTANEOUS PATHOLOGY
DRUG REVIEW
E-CHAT
Editorial
EDITORIAL COMMENTARY
ERRATUM
ETHICAL HOTLINE
ETHICS
Field: Evolution of dermatologic surgergy
FOCUS
FROM THE ARCHIVES OF INDIAN JOURNAL OF DERMATO SURGERY
From the Editor's Desk
FROM THE LITERATURE
GUEST EDITORIAL
Guidelines
Images in Clinical Practice
Images in Dermatosurgery
INNOVATION
Innovations
INVITED COMMENTARY
JCAS Symposium
LETTER
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
LETTERS
Message from the President
NEW HORIZON
Original Article
Practice Point
Practice Points
PRESIDENTIAL SPEECH
QUIZ
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Resident’s Page
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
SHORT COMMUNICATION
Spot the Diagnosis [Quiz]
STUDY
SURGICAL PEARL
SYMPOSIUM
Symposium—Lasers
Symposium: Hair in Dermatology
Symposium: Lasers Review Article
View Point
VIEWPOINT
VIEWPOINTS
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Correspondence
12 (
3
); 196-200
doi:
10.4103/JCAS.JCAS_181_18

Neck Rejuvenation with Thread Lift

Department of Dermatology, Mehektagul Dermaclinic, New Delhi, India
Department of Dermatology, Command Hospital Air Force, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Address for correspondence: Dr. Sandeep Arora, Department of Dermatology, Command Hospital Air Force, Bengaluru 560007, Karnataka, India. E-mail: aroraderma@gmail.com

Licence

This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Disclaimer:
This article was originally published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow and was migrated to Scientific Scholar after the change of Publisher.

Aging is a universal phenomenon and inevitable. Skin too ages just as other organs of the body. In addition to generic body aging, extrinsic factors such as sunlight (visible, ultraviolet, and infrared), smoking, and air pollution induce aging due to their direct impact along with ethnic skin characteristics, which are unique to individuals.[1] In addition to these, age-related structural changes in the bones, ligaments, fat pads, muscles, and skin all add to the aged skin look. Neck region is a perfect example of how skin in an exposed area is affected by all the above factors, resulting in textural changes with wrinkled blotchy, loose, inelastic, sagging skin; increase in neck volume with platysmal bands and Venus rings; and/or blunting of the cervicomental angle.[2]

Chronological aging cannot be prevented. It can be delayed and accepted in a more elegant manner, whereas photoaging may be prevented to a certain extent by the use of the correct amount of sunblock starting at the right age. However, structural correction, which is just as important, can be addressed to take care of the third inevitable change, which needs correction of superficial as well as deep layers to get a natural and harmonious result.[3]

Twenty female patients with various signs of neck aging that attended a dermatology center between March 2017 and June 2018 were treated for neck rejuvenation using different types of threads. Those having received any other cosmetic procedure for neck rejuvenation, history of keloidal or bleeding tendencies, and pregnant and lactating patients were excluded.

Neck aging assessment, in the form of neck wrinkling was carried out by six-point wrinkle assessment scale by Lemperle et al.[4] (0: no wrinkles, 1: just perceptible wrinkle, 2: shallow wrinkle, 3: moderately deep wrinkle, 4: deep wrinkle with well-defined edges, and 5: very deep wrinkle with redundant fold) and in the form of neck volume was carried out by five-point assessment scale by Sattler et al.[5] [Figure 1]. All cases were photographed pre-procedure and at 3 months post-procedure.

Sattler, neck volume five-point assessment scale
Figure 1
Sattler, neck volume five-point assessment scale

The most common signs of the neck aging treated were wrinkling of the neck skin, textural changes, platysmal bands, and double chin. Five patients with double chin and obliteration of the cervicomental angle were initially treated with two sessions each of injection lipolysis with deoxycholate, followed by threads. Three patients with excessive cord-like platysmal banding were initially treated with botulinum toxin, followed by neck rejuvenation with threads. We used both polydioxanone (PDO) (mono, screw, and barbed) as well as poly l-lactic acid (PLLA) threads with bidirectional cones. Choice of thread used was based on the primary indication.

When just rejuvenation of the neck in terms of textural improvement was desired, monofilament or screw PDO threads were used, as these threads improve microcirculation and collagenosis and thus the texture of the skin and mild wrinkling is corrected. When reduction in volume due to a double chin was desired, monofilament PDO threads were used in a crosshatch technique to aid in lipolysis, along with tightening the skin, thus attempting to restore the optimal cervicomental angle.[6] To improve sagging and severe wrinkling, more stretch in the horizontal plane was desired, and hence to redrape the skin, we used PDO bidirectional barbed or PLLA bidirectional cone threads.

To give a long-lasting result, PLLA was chosen over PDO threads in patients who could afford, as it has a longer half-life of 18 months as compared to 6 months of PDO. A crosshatch technique was used where more surface area was required to give greater textural improvement and also as optimal vectors for double chin. A hammock technique was used to stretch the skin where laxity was more, and to give a good anchoring at the mastoid fascia. Linear threading was used where just volumization with threads was desired as in Venus rings [Figure 2].

Techniques used for thread insertion. (A, B) Crosshatch. (C, D) Hammock. (E) Linear threading
Figure 2
Techniques used for thread insertion. (A, B) Crosshatch. (C, D) Hammock. (E) Linear threading

Procedural steps followed were as follows: Topical anesthesia using eutectic mixture of prilocaine and lidocaine was used as a local anesthetic for 1h before PDO under aseptic precautions. For insertion of cog threads, local infiltration using 2% lignocaine with adrenaline 1:200,000 was given for points of insertion and an 18-gauge needle was used to make the entry point. Thread insertion was thereafter done under aseptic precautions.

Post-procedure advice included ice pack application for the anticipated swelling and edema. Capsule amoxicillin (625mg) with clavulanic acid (125mg) was given three times a day for 5 days. Patients were advised against wide mouth opening for 48h and to abstain from smoking, vigorous exercises, and cosmetic procedures in the treated area for a week.

Results were assessed based on the patients’ response to treatment and recorded according to the visual analog scale (VAS) (4+, >75% improvement; 3+, 50%–75% improvement; 2+, 25%–50% improvement; 1+, 0%–25% improvement; and no response). Neck wrinkling and volume assessment change as per the aforementioned scales were also carried out and compared using the paired t-test. Complications, if any, were recorded.

Twenty female patients were treated [Table 1] [Figures 3 and 4]. The mean pre-procedure neck wrinkling and volume assessment was 3.65 and 2.45, whereas post-procedure was 1.4 and 1.1. These were statistically significant (P < 0.0001 and P < 0.001). Fifteen cases were satisfied with their procedure (VAS >2+), whereas one failed to respond due to severe platysmal laxity. Post-procedure bruising was seen in 11 cases and edema was observed in all as a sequela, which lasted for 48–72h. No other complications were observed.

Table 1 Summary of cases and pre- and post-procedure assessment
Serial number Age (years) Sign of aging NW grade pretreatment NW grade posttreatment NV grade pretreatment NV grade posttreatment VAS Types of thread used
1 35 Textural change 1 0 0 0 4+ Monofilament
2 58 Wrinkling + platysmal bands 4 2 3 2 2+ Screw
3 45 Wrinkling + Double chin 4 2 4 2 4+ Monofilament
4 44 Venus rings 5 2 1 0 3+ Monofilament + screw
5 52 Wrinkling + textural changes 4 2 2 1 2+ Monofilament
6 46 Wrinkling + textural changes 3 1 2 1 4+ Screw
7 35 Textural change 1 0 0 0 4+ Monofilament
8 60 Wrinkling + platysmal bands 5 2 4 3 2+ Screw
9 44 Textural changes + wrinkling 4 1 2 0 4+ Cog + monofilament
10 48 Wrinkling + neck sagging 3 1 2 1 4+ PLLA
11 52 Wrinkling + platysmal bands 5 3 4 3 1+ Cog
12 37 Textural change 3 0 0 0 4+ Monofilament
13 63 Wrinkling + platysmal bands 4 2 3 2 3+ Cog + monofilament
14 45 Wrinkling + textural changes 4 1 2 0 3+ Cog
15 44 Wrinkling + double chin 3 1 3 1 3+ Cog
16 52 Wrinkling + turkey neck 4 2 4 2 3+ PLLA
17 49 Wrinkling + turkey neck 5 3 4 1 3+ PLLA
18 41 Wrinkling + double chin 2 0 1 0 4+ Cog
19 52 Wrinkling + double chin + turkey neck 4 1 4 2 3+ Cog + monofilament
20 47 Wrinkling + double chin + turkey neck 5 2 4 2 2+ Monofilament + PLLA

NW = neck wrinkles, NV = neck volume, VAS = visual analog scale

Pre-procedure (left) and post-procedure (right) of cases 3 (above) and 8 (below)
Figure 3
Pre-procedure (left) and post-procedure (right) of cases 3 (above) and 8 (below)
Pre-procedure (left) and post-procedure (right) of cases 17 (above) and 19 (below)
Figure 4
Pre-procedure (left) and post-procedure (right) of cases 17 (above) and 19 (below)

PDO and PLLA threads stimulate fibroblast, collagenization, and neo-angiogenesis, which improve the skin texture and laxity. Repeat sessions may be needed similar to other aesthetic procedures to achieve and maintain the desired result. They can thus be used for improving skin texture as well as wrinkling and laxity to achieve the ideal aesthetic appeal: skin of the neck and face to be in sync, with minimal discomfort or downtime.

Declaration of patient consent

The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form the patient(s) has/have given his/her/their consent for his/her/their images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The patients understand that their names and initials will not be published and due efforts will be made to conceal their identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. , . The ageing neck: a diagnostic approach to surgical and nonsurgical options. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2013;15:56-64.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. , , . Visual criteria for success in restoring the youthful neck. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1980;66:826-37.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. , , , , . Neck rejuvenation revisited. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;118:1251-63.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. , , , , . A classification of facial wrinkles. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001;108:1735-50. discussion 1751-2
    [Google Scholar]
  5. , , , , , , . Validated Assessment Scale for neck volume. Dermatol Surg. 2012;38:343-50.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. , . Polydioxanone thread lifting: considerations and patient expectations. J Aesthet Nurs. 2016;5:70-3.
    [Google Scholar]
Show Sections