Background
The upper lip area is an important component of facial aesthetics, and aging produces an increase in the vertical height of the upper lip. Different upper lip lifting techniques are described in the literature.
Objectives
This systematic review aimed to assess both invasive and noninvasive upper lip lifting techniques with patient satisfaction, adverse effects, and quantitative measurements of lifting efficiency.
Methods
This study was conducted per PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE (OvidSP), and Cochrane Library database were searched from September 14, 2022, to October 12, 2022. Inclusion criteria were reporting on upper lip lift efficiency with quantitative measurements of the lifting degree.
Results
Out of 495 studies through the search strategy, nine articles were included in the systematic review, eight for surgical procedures and one for nonsurgical. Surgical procedures seem to have better longevity than nonsurgical techniques. Reported patient satisfaction for both surgical and nonsurgical treatments was good with no severe complaints. The quantitative measures differ between researches and may be classified into two metrics: anatomy ratio computation using photographic analysis or direct height measurement with a caliper and precise parameters utilizing a three-dimensional method.
Conclusion
In general, surgical therapies seem to have a longer-lasting lifting effect on upper lip lifts with an inevitable scar, while nonsurgical techniques are minimally invasive but temporary. There was a lack of consistency in the measurements used to assess lifting efficiency. A consistent quantitative assessment can be beneficial for both clinical decision-making and high-level evidence research.
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.
