Translate this page into:
Quantitative analysis of brow lifting with polydioxanone barbed threads using 3D imaging: A retrospective study
*Corresponding author: Moon Seop Choi, Department of Plastic Surgery, Grace Plastic Surgery Clinic, Seoul, Republic of Korea. mschoi@graceclinic.co.kr
-
Received: ,
Accepted: ,
How to cite this article: Chang DY, Choi MS. Quantitative analysis of brow lifting with polydioxanone barbed threads using 3D imaging: A retrospective study. J Cutan Aesthet Surg. doi: 10.25259/JCAS_93_2026
Abstract
Objectives:
As people age, facial ptosis leads to wrinkles, prompting interest in rejuvenation techniques such as thread lifting. This procedure targets sagging areas such as the jowl, nasolabial folds, brows, and double chin using barbed threads for enhanced tissue grip. The study explores polydioxanone (PDO) MINT threads, featuring 360° helical barbs, for brow lifting, hypothesizing stronger lifting effects due to their unique design. Results suggest barbed threads may effectively improve brow ptosis.
Material and Methods:
This retrospective single-arm cohort study analyzed 27 patients (4 males, 23 females) who underwent forehead lifting using molding-type barbed threads, which is one of the many types of MINT threads, from September 2022 to August 2023, with a 6-month follow-up. Patients were evaluated for procedural efficacy and side effects through expanded global aesthetic improvement scale (GAIS) scores and optional 3D imaging (Vectra H2).
Results:
This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of MINT PETIT PDO threads for brow lifting in 27 patients (mean age 48.8 ± 9.75 years). Results showed significant improvement in GAIS scores and 3D-measured eyelid length post-procedure (p < 0.0001), though effects diminished over time due to thread absorption and tissue movement.
Conclusion:
This study explores MINT PETIT PDO barbed threads as a minimally invasive alternative to endoscopic brow lifts. The 360° helical barb design provides effective tissue anchoring, with subcutaneous insertion offering safety advantages over deeper techniques. While results showed significant initial improvement, effects diminished over time due to thread absorption and natural brow movement. Thread lifting may serve as a temporary solution or adjunct to surgical brow lifts, particularly for patients seeking less invasive options.
Keywords
Brow lifting
MINT thread
Thread lifting
INTRODUCTION
As people age, the skin of the face undergoes a process of ptosis, resulting in the formation of wrinkles. It is not surprising that a considerable number of individuals express concern over this phenomenon and aspire to appear more youthful. In response to this concern, medical professionals and scientists have dedicated significant efforts to investigate and address this issue. Recently, thread lifting has emerged as a popular procedure to address facial sagging. This facial sagging is mainly seen in the lateral cheek area, where the target of thread lifting is usually the resolution of the jowl. With age, brow sagging occurs, which also causes eyelid drooping, and to compensate, patients often move their eyebrows a lot, causing severe forehead wrinkles. In other cases of brow ptosis, the distance between the eyelid and the brow is close, causing a stuffy appearance.
To improve brow ptosis, surgical approaches may include endoscopic brow lift, various brow lift techniques (such as subbrow skin excision and suprabrow lift), or forehead reduction surgery with scalp excision. And lifting with a thread can also play a role.1-3 Recently, threads used for lifting have barbs, unlike general suture threads. After the thread is inserted under the skin, the tissues are caught by the barbs and pulled. There are many types of threads used for lifting purposes on the market. In this paper, the authors used polydioxanone (PDO) absorbable MINT thread (HansBiomed Co., Ltd., Seoul, Korea) for brow lifting. The barb of MINT thread is unique and a molding type, which has the advantage of maintaining the thickness of the thread in the area where the barb is Figure 1. Barbs surround the thread in a 360° helical fashion to enhance the holding power inside 3D-structured soft tissue. This product is USFDA 510 (K) cleared as a suspension surgery to temporarily fixate the cheek subdermis in an elevated position. These points made the authors think that it could have a stronger lifting effect. In this paper, we will examine the effect of brow lifting by lifting thread with barbs.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Study design
In this retrospective single-arm cohort study, we retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent forehead lifting using MINT PETIT (HansBiomed Co., Ltd., Seoul, Korea) at Change Clinic, Seoul, Korea, from September 30, 2022, to August 30, 2023. Cases that met the inclusion/exclusion criteria were secured, and only the information necessary for the study was recorded in the questionnaire to collect data. Medical records were reviewed from September 30, 2022, to March 31, 2024, which includes a follow-up observation period of about 6 months (±1 month) of the subjects who received the procedure. Among 32 subjects, 27 participants (male 4, female 23) were enrolled, except 5 subjects who dropped out by exclusion criteria. Patients visit the hospital 2–3 times after the thread lifting procedure to check the side effects and the effect of the procedure. The recommended visit times are generally before the procedure, immediately after the procedure, 1 month after the procedure, 3 months after the procedure, and 6 months after the procedure, and the visit time may vary depending on the subject’s situation. When visiting, we check for side effects and have the patient evaluate the effect of the procedure using the global aesthetic improvement scale (GAIS) to check the degree of improvement. In addition, for all patients, 3D photography (Vectra H2, Canfield Scientific, Parsippany, NJ, USA) is performed before and after the procedure to check the change.
Inclusion criteria
Adults aged 19–70 who received forehead lifting using MINT PETIT (HansBiomed Co., Ltd., Seoul, Korea) from September 30, 2022, to August 30, 2023
Those who have received and understood a detailed explanation of the forehead lifting procedure and signed the “MINT PETIT Research Portrait Rights Use Agreement” to agree to the collected personal information being used for future marketing and research data
Exclusion criteria
Those who received other cosmetic procedures or treatments within 6 months (±1 month) after the first procedure
Those whose collected photos were damaged to the extent that they could not be evaluated.
MINT thread
In this study, MINT PETIT among the MINT threads series was used for brow lift. MINT PETIT has a total thread length of 15 cm and is inserted into a 19G cannula with a length of 8.5 cm excluding the handle. The barb is bidirectional and can be used for lifting purposes [Figure 2].
Surgical technique
To achieve optimal results, the most suitable lifting vector is determined by manually pulling the forehead skin upward to observe the best direction for lifting. Based on this assessment, four strategic entry points are selected along each brow to maximize lifting efficiency. The vector design is structured to maximize the fixation effect by crossing two threads at strategic points.
Before the insertion, supraorbital and supratrochlear nerve blocks are performed first by local anesthesia (2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine). In addition, local anesthesia (2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine) is injected at each entry point to minimize patient discomfort.
A small entry point is created using an 18-G cannula at each of these predetermined sites. A MINT PETIT is then inserted through these points, advancing into the subcutaneous fat layer beneath the eyebrow. The threads are carefully engaged along the pre-determined lifting vectors extending toward the superior forehead, ensuring an even distribution of tension to lift the brow naturally [Video 1].
Video 1:
Video 1:Surgical procedure for inserting MINT threads.The forehead has a relatively thin subcutaneous fat layer, so the cannula was advanced as close to the frontalis muscle as possible to ensure effective lifting. To secure the thread ends, the tip of the cannula was finally positioned above the periosteum after penetrating the frontalis muscle. Once the thread is fully inserted, the cannula is carefully withdrawn while stabilizing the thread in place to maintain optimal positioning. The cannula is removed while keeping the skin pulled upward to reinforce the lifting effect and ensure proper thread placement. After removal, a gentle massage is performed around the treated area to help evenly distribute the tension, minimize irregularities, and ensure a natural contour. The massage is primarily applied to the eyebrow entry points rather than the forehead itself to prevent excessive brow lifting and achieve a balanced aesthetic outcome.
Patients are advised to avoid excessive facial movements for the initial recovery period to enhance the effectiveness of the lift. Two patients with excessive forehead muscle movement, 8 units of botulinum toxin were also administered to reduce the activity of the frontalis muscle during the insertion of the thread and to keep the barbs holding onto the tissue. However, 3D photography was performed while the brow was resting.
Outcome evaluation
Outcome evaluation was performed in three directions: The satisfaction degree (3-“Excellent,” 2-“very good,” 1-“good,” 0-“fair,” and -1-“poor”) reported by the subject, the 5-point (GAIS 3-“very much improved,” 2-“much improved,” 1-“improved,” 0-“no change,” and -1-“worse”) score evaluated by the practitioner and an independent medical professional, and finally the evaluation of the 3D measurement value using Vectra H2 in immediately post-operatively, 1 month postoperatively, and 3 months postoperatively. Side effects were also recorded in detail until 6 months postoperatively, for example, thread extrusion, infection, foreign body reaction, granuloma, hematoma, bruising, nerve damage, dimpling, or severe asymmetry.
3D measurement
3D image analysis was performed using Vectra H2. Images were taken before surgery, postoperative 1 month, and 3 months, and the distances of each landmark were measured. The description of each landmark is below, and the distances measured for comparison were En-EEn, Pi-EPs, and Ex-EEx [Figure 3].
<Landmark>
En: Endocanthion, inner commissure of the palpebral fissure.
Ex: Exocanthion, outer commissure of the palpebral fissure.
Pi: Palpebral inferiors, Point vertical to the pupil center at the lower palpebral margin on the lash root.
EEn: Inferior margin point of eyebrow vertical to En.
EPs: Point vertically to the pupil center at the inferior margin of eyebrows.
EEx: Point vertically to Ex at the inferior margin of eyebrows.
Statistical analysis
Analysis of primary validity evaluation variables
The primary efficacy evaluation index is the subject’s satisfaction degree and GAIS score immediately after the procedure, 1 month after the procedure, and 3 months after the procedure, and the average GAIS score of the practitioner, an independent medical professional. For the measurements at each visit, descriptive statistics (mean, (standard deviation [SD]), median, minimum, maximum) are presented, and the data were tested for normal distribution. If normality was satisfied, one sample t-test was performed, and if not, one sample Wilcoxon’s signed rank test was performed to test whether there was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.0167).
Analysis of secondary validity evaluation variables (the change of eyelid length)
The secondary validity evaluation index is the change in length of several points that are detected by Vectra H2 length before and after the procedure, 1 month after the procedure, and 3 months after the procedure [Figure 3]. Descriptive statistics (mean, SD, median, minimum, maximum) were presented for the measurements by visit and the change before and after the procedure, 1 month after the procedure, and 3 months after the procedure. For the change, the normal distribution of the data was tested, and if normality was satisfied, a paired t-test was performed, and if not, a Wilcoxon’s signed rank test was performed to test whether there was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.0167).
Analysis of safety evaluation variables
For subjects who experienced at least one major adverse event during approximately 6 months (±1 month) after the procedure, the number of occurrences, number of subjects, and occurrence rate (number of occurrences/total number of subjects) were presented in three ways.
Presentation of overall frequency and occurrence rate
Classification by “System Organ Class” and “Preferred Term” using the latest version of MedDRA (Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities Terminology)
Presentation of frequency and occurrence rate by each classification
Presentation of frequency and occurrence rate by major adverse events.
RESULTS
A statistical analysis was conducted on 27 subjects, excluding 5 subjects who dropped out during the study, out of 32 subjects aged 19–70 who met the selection/exclusion criteria and underwent forehead lifting using MINT PETIT from September 30, 2022, to August 30, 2023. The average age of all subjects was 48.81 ± 9.75 (years), and there were 4 male and 23 female [Table 1]. Representative figures are shown in Figures 4 and 5.
| Patients | N=27 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | Mean | SD | Median | Min | Max |
| 48.81 | 9.75 | 50.0 | 31.0 | 65.0 | |
| Sex | |||||
| Male | 4 | ||||
| Female | 23 | ||||
SD: Standard deviation, N=Total number of patients
Analysis of primary validity evaluation variables (GAIS score)
Tables 2 and 3 show the results of the satisfaction degree and the GAIS scores evaluated by the subjects and physicians. There was a statistically significant difference with a p < 0.0001 immediately after the procedure, 1 month later, and 3 months later.
| Score | n | Mean | SD | Median | Min | Max | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Immediately | 27 | 1.56 | 0.58 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | $<0.0001* |
| POD 1M | 27 | 1.33 | 0.48 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | $<0.0001* |
| POD 3M | 27 | 1.19 | 0.40 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | $<0.0001* |
| Average GAIS score | n | Mean | SD | Median | Min | Max | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Immediately | 27 | 2.56 | 0.64 | 2.5 | 0.5 | 3.0 | $<0.0001* |
| POD 1M | 27 | 1.85 | 0.74 | 2.0 | 0.5 | 3.0 | #<0.0001* |
| POD 3M | 27 | 1.39 | 0.73 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 3.0 | #<0.0001* |
#One sample t-test, $One sample Wilcoxon’s signed rank test, SD: Standard deviation, GAIS: Global aesthetic improvement scale, POD: Post-operative day, *: p< 0.001, n= Total number of patients
Analysis of secondary validity evaluation variables (the change of eyelid length)
Table 4 shows the results of measuring the distance (mm) between landmarks En and EEn using 3D data (Vectra H2). Compared to before the procedure, the changes immediately after the procedure, 1 month later, and 3 months later showed statistically significant differences with p < 0.0001 for both the right and left sides.
| Length | n | Mean | SD | Median | Min | Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Right | ||||||
| Pre-operative | 27 | 20.31 | 2.23 | 20.2 | 16.2 | 25.4 |
| Immediately | 27 | 21.43 | 2.19 | 21.3 | 18.1 | 27.1 |
| Change | 27 | 1.12 | 0.88 | 0.9 | 0.2 | 3.8 |
| p-value | †<0.0001* | |||||
| POD 1M | 27 | 20.92 | 1.98 | 20.7 | 17.2 | 24.8 |
| Change | 27 | 0.61 | 0.51 | 0.5 | −0.6 | 1.6 |
| p-value | ^<0.0001* | |||||
| POD 3M | 27 | 20.92 | 2.16 | 20.8 | 16.4 | 25.4 |
| Change | 27 | 0.61 | 0.54 | 0.4 | −0.2 | 1.8 |
| p-value | †<0.0001* | |||||
| Left | ||||||
| Pre-operative | 27 | 19.98 | 2.00 | 19.9 | 15.8 | 23.4 |
| Immediately | 27 | 21.57 | 2.22 | 21.8 | 17.5 | 27.3 |
| Change | 27 | 1.59 | 1.18 | 1.2 | −0.1 | 4.2 |
| p-value | ^<0.0001* | |||||
| POD 1M | 27 | 20.65 | 2.11 | 20.4 | 17.0 | 23.9 |
| Change | 27 | 0.67 | 0.65 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 2.5 |
| p-value | †<0.0001* | |||||
| POD 3M | 27 | 20.69 | 2.17 | 21.1 | 16.7 | 24.2 |
| Change | 27 | 0.71 | 0.60 | 0.6 | −0.3 | 2.3 |
| p-value | ^<0.0001* | |||||
Table 5 shows the results of measuring the distance (mm) between Pi and EPs among landmarks using 3D data (Vectra H2). Compared to before the procedure, the changes immediately after the procedure, 1 month later, and 3 months later showed statistically significant differences with p < 0.0001 for both the right and left sides.
| Length | n | Mean | SD | Median | Min | Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Right | ||||||
| Pre-operative | 27 | 23.60 | 2.33 | 23.6 | 20.2 | 28.3 |
| Immediately | 27 | 25.47 | 2.66 | 25.0 | 21.5 | 30.1 |
| Change | 27 | 1.87 | 1.65 | 1.6 | −0.6 | 6.4 |
| p-value | ^<0.0001* | |||||
| POD 1M | 27 | 24.39 | 2.48 | 24.3 | 20.2 | 29.4 |
| Change | 27 | 0.80 | 0.74 | 0.6 | 0.0 | 2.9 |
| p-value | ^<0.0001* | |||||
| POD 3M | 27 | 24.09 | 2.44 | 24.1 | 20.2 | 29.0 |
| Change | 27 | 0.50 | 0.62 | 0.3 | −0.5 | 2.3 |
| p-value | †<0.0001* | |||||
| Left | ||||||
| Pre-operative | 27 | 23.26 | 2.26 | 23.0 | 19.6 | 27.9 |
| Immediately | 27 | 25.58 | 2.67 | 25.3 | 21.7 | 31.4 |
| Change | 27 | 2.32 | 1.59 | 2.0 | 0.1 | 6.3 |
| p-value | ^<0.0001* | |||||
| POD 1M | 27 | 24.14 | 2.43 | 23.5 | 20.1 | 28.0 |
| Change | 27 | 0.88 | 0.79 | 0.8 | −0.6 | 2.5 |
| p-value | ^<0.0001* | |||||
| POD 3M | 27 | 23.69 | 2.32 | 23.5 | 20.4 | 28.4 |
| Change | 27 | 0.43 | 0.59 | 0.3 | −0.3 | 2.5 |
| p-value | †<0.0001* | |||||
Table 6 shows the results of measuring the distance (mm) between landmarks Ex and EEx using 3D data (Vectra H2). Compared to before the procedure, the changes immediately after the procedure, 1 month later, and 3 months later showed statistically significant differences with p < 0.0001 for both the right and left sides.
| Length | n | Mean | SD | Median | Min | Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Right | ||||||
| Pre-operative | 27 | 19.89 | 2.52 | 19.3 | 15.4 | 24.3 |
| Immediately | 27 | 21.80 | 2.61 | 21.4 | 17.1 | 27.0 |
| Change | 27 | 1.91 | 1.44 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 4.9 |
| p-value | †<0.0001* | |||||
| POD 1M | 27 | 20.82 | 2.41 | 20.6 | 16.6 | 24.8 |
| Change | 27 | 0.93 | 0.58 | 0.9 | −0.1 | 2.8 |
| p-value | ^<0.0001* | |||||
| POD 3M | 27 | 20.50 | 2.36 | 20.5 | 16.7 | 24.4 |
| Change | 27 | 0.61 | 0.58 | 0.4 | −0.2 | 1.8 |
| p-value | †<0.0001* | |||||
| Left | ||||||
| Pre-operative | 27 | 19.81 | 2.59 | 19.3 | 14.9 | 25.2 |
| Immediately | 27 | 22.34 | 2.84 | 21.9 | 18.2 | 29.0 |
| Change | 27 | 2.53 | 1.68 | 2.2 | 0.1 | 6.5 |
| p-value | ^<0.0001* | |||||
| POD 1M | 27 | 20.87 | 2.84 | 20.6 | 15.9 | 27.0 |
| Change | 27 | 1.06 | 0.84 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 3.1 |
| p-value | †<0.0001* | |||||
| POD 3M | 27 | 20.56 | 2.69 | 20.5 | 15.8 | 26.5 |
| Change | 27 | 0.75 | 0.60 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 2.4 |
| p-value | †<0.0001* | |||||
^Paired t-test, †Wilcoxon’s signed rank test, SD: Standard deviation, POD: Post-operative day, p < 0.001.
Analysis of safety evaluation variables
There were no major adverse events in the subjects included in this study.
DISCUSSION
As we age, the brows tend to sag downward, and many people want brow lifting because of the stuffy and aged impression. The traditional method of brow lifting is surgical treatment, usually using an endoscope.4 However, many people have high barriers to surgery and seek other methods. Due to these reasons, several studies have attempted brow lifting using barbed threads, and the authors have also applied MINT threads to brow lifting.1-3,5
MINT thread is an absorbable barbed thread that is composed of PDO. PDO components have excellent biocompatibility and have been used for a long time as an absorbable suture that can be used in the human body. However, to have lifting performance, there must be barbs on the surface of the thread, and you can find a variety of lifting threads on the market depending on the shape, number, and direction of the barbs.6,7 MINT thread used by the authors is made by molding the barbs during the manufacturing process, so the core of the thread with and without barbs maintains a certain thickness, and because it is made by molding, the barbs are quite stable and can maintain strength well [Figure 1]. A typical lifting thread has a bidirectional barb. This means that the proximal barb and distal barb of the thread face each other, and lifting is usually done by the proximal barb acting as a fixation point, and the distal barb is pulled up to lift the desired target tissue. Of course, the opposite direction is also possible, but in this paper, the eyebrow attached to the proximal barb is directed upward toward the distal barb of the cephalic area. Since the distance for thread insertion in the forehead is generally shorter than that in the jowl, MINT PETIT among MINT threads was used. In addition, the MINT thread has a 360° helical pattern in the shape of the barb. This is thought to be effective in anchoring three-dimensional soft tissue and is thought to help maintain the results of lifting the forehead and brow, which move a lot.
Bidirectional barbed threads are the most commonly used in thread lifting procedures. In these threads, the anterior barbs primarily function to elevate the tissue, while the posterior barbs serve to anchor and hold the lifted tissue in place [Figure 2]. In conventional lifting of broader areas such as the lower face or jawline, this mechanism generally works well. However, in regions where the lifting span is relatively short, such as the forehead, mid-cheek, or mandibular angle, using a floating technique without additional tying or anchoring methods can significantly shorten the posterior anchoring segment. As a result, although an initial lifting effect may be observed, the cumulative mechanical stress over time can weaken the posterior fixation, leading to thread migration or a premature decline in the lifting effect. Therefore, in short-span regions, threads with a shorter lifting segment should be employed.
Anatomically, the forehead has several layers, and the layer into which the thread is inserted varies from author to author. There are two layers into which the thread is inserted: the subcutaneous layer and the subgalea-frontalis layer.1-3,5 For the thread to enter the subgalea-frontalis layer, the thread must be inserted into the entry point, and the cannula must penetrate the frontalis muscle and reach deep into the supraperiosteal layer. However, since the main trunk of the supraorbital artery or supratrochlear artery runs in the supraperiosteal layer up to 2–3 cm above the eyebrow, there is a possibility of tearing of the blood vessel, so care must be taken when inserting the cannula. However, if the thread is inserted into the subcutaneous layer, it is more intuitive and easier. The entry point is made in the intrabrow, and the first tissue encountered when the thread is inserted is the subcutaneous layer. After that, the cannula simply ascends in the cephalic direction along the curvature of the forehead. This has the advantage of not encountering large vessels during the thread insertion process, and although it cannot be said that there is no possibility that the thread may be visible in thin skin, it is difficult for it to occur in reality, and such a problem did not occur in this study.
The significance of this study is that it quantitatively analyzed thread lifting procedures to raise the forehead. The results show that the amount of change in the position of the eyebrows is large for the first month after surgery, and the amount of change is small thereafter. This is due to the fact that the movement of the eyebrows and forehead is very dynamic, but the PDO thread is not elastic enough to respond to it. This is why it is important to fully explain these changes to the patient before surgery.
In this study, botulinum toxin was injected into the forehead of two patients with severe brow activity while threads were inserted. The injections were administered with the expectation that the barbed threads would securely anchor the surrounding tissue. However, 3D photography was performed while the patients were in a resting state with their brows lowered. Nevertheless, this study was unable to confirm whether the injection of botulinum toxin would improve the durability of the thread’s effects or prolong their duration.
In this study, patient satisfaction and GAIS score decreased over time, and considering that the measurement results of Vectra H2 also changed in the same way, it can be inferred that the lifting results will not last for a long time. This can be attributed to the constant movement of the forehead and the nature of the PDO material. If we discuss the clinical use of thread lifting, it can be applied to brow lift surgery. Brow lift surgery is a popular surgery not only for aging but also for young people who want to raise the position of their brow. However, as time passes, the raised brow gradually lowers.8 If threads are used together with brow lift surgery, it can be thought that the initial relapse can be reduced. In addition, it can be used as a means for patients to experience it in advance before deciding on brow lift surgery.
While the quantitative analysis using the Vectra H2 system is a strength of this study, several limitations should be noted. Primarily, due to the retrospective nature of this study conducted in a real-world clinical setting, we did not report inter-rater or intra-rater reliability metrics, such as the intraclass correlation coefficient, for the 3D landmark identification (En, EEn, Pi, EPs, Ex, and EEx). The lack of these reliability metrics introduces a potential for measurement bias, which may affect the interpretation of the quantitative outcomes. Future prospective studies incorporating multiple raters and rigorous reliability assessments are recommended to further validate the precision of 3D photogrammetry in measuring thread lifting outcomes.
CONCLUSION
Thread lifting is a minimally invasive procedure that can elevate the brow. Of course, the duration and results may be less than surgical procedures, but it can be used sufficiently not only for patients whose brows have dropped significantly due to the aging process, but also as an auxiliary procedure for brow lift surgery.
Authors’ contributions:
Doo Yeoul Chang: Conceived the idea for this study. Doo Yeoul Chang and Moon Seop Choi : Developed the theory and performed the calculations. Moon Seop Choi: Led the writing of this paper. Both authors discussed the results and contributed to the final draft.
Ethical approval:
The research/study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at the National Research Committee, Korea, number P01-202409-01-048, dated September 25, 2024. CTR Number: KCT0010615.
Declaration of patient consent:
The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form, the patient has given consent for their images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The patient understands that the patient’s names and initials will not be published and due efforts will be made to conceal their identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed.
Conflicts of interest:
The authors declare that they are educators for Hansbiomed (HansBiomed Co., Ltd., Seoul, Korea). The authors received statistical support for this study but no financial compensation.
Use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for manuscript preparation:
The authors confirm that there was no use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for assisting in the writing or editing of the manuscript, and no images were manipulated using AI.
Financial support and sponsorship: Nil.
References
- Anatomical considerations for thread-based brow lifting and wrinkle treatment. J Dermatolog Treat. 2025;36:2448265.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Anatomical perspectives of brow-lifting using threads: Clinical cases with techniques. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2024;23:4140-5.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Eyebrow lifting with barbed threads: A simple, safe, and effective ambulatory procedure. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2023;22:140-5.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Eyebrow lifting using multidirectional absorbable thread. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2023;22:2780-4.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Aptos suture lifting methods: 10 Years of experience. Clin Plast Surg. 2009;36:281-306.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Thread lifting materials: A review of its difference in terms of technical and mechanical perspective. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2024;17:999-1006.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Endoscopic brow lift: A personal review of 538 patients and comparison of fixation techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;113:1242-50. discussion 1251-42
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]