Conjoint Fascial Sheath Suspension for Correction of Recurrent Blepharoptosis

Hao Dong-Yue,Cang Zheng-Qiang,Cui Jiang-Bo,Chen Yong-Jun,Song Bao-Qiang,Cao Jiao,Liu Chao-Hua,Peng Pai
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-021-02542-7
IF: 2.708
2021-01-01
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery
Abstract:Blepharoptosis is defined as an abnormally low-positioned upper eyelid margin in the primary gaze position, which results in cosmetic discomfort and functional visual dysfunction. Recurrence is one of the common complications after ptosis correction and requires further revision. Conjoint fascial sheath (CFS) suspension has become increasingly popular for ptosis. In this article, we described our experience of CFS suspension in the treatment of recurrent blepharoptosis and evaluated the postoperative outcomes so as to guide the clinical application of CFS suspension. Thirty-eight patients (48 eyelids) who had recurrent blepharoptosis and received CFS suspension were included in this study. Before the surgery, the degree of ptosis and levator function were assessed. The postoperative evaluation consisted of the correction effect, eyelid symmetry, protective closure function of eyelid, and surgical complications. At the final follow-up, 46 eyelids (95.8%) showed an ideal correction, of which 24 eyelids (50%) showed sufficient correction and 22 eyelids (45.8%) showed normal correction. The remaining 2 eyelids (4.2%) showed under-correction. Among all 38 patients, 26 patients (68.4%) achieved good symmetry, and 10 patients (26.3%) achieved fair symmetry, while only 2 patients (5.3%) showed poor symmetry. Recovery time of eyelid protective closure function was 3.9 ± 1.04 months (range, 2.5–6 months). There were no complications except residual lagophthalmos (9 eyelids) residual conjunctival prolapse (10 eyelids). CFS suspension is an effective method for the correction of recurrent blepharoptosis due to its sufficient correction effect, recovery of eyelid protective closure function, and less complication rate. 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 .
What problem does this paper attempt to address?