This Article  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

PAUL A. BLAIR, MD
New Orleans

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1988;114(3):239.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

At the annual meeting of the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery in Chicago, Sept 19, 1987, Dr Lawrence D. Schoenrock, Santa Rosa, Calif, and Mack Prendergast, San Francisco, made the point that the use of malar implants is basically a hit-or-miss approach. Since the malar mound defines the lateral contour of the midface, it is very important that the implantation is performed correctly. The benefits of a prominent or good malar mound contour are a more youthful appearance, improved facial harmony, and deemphasis of other projecting structures of the face. Drs Schoenrock and Prendergast made the point that the ideal implant should be anatomically proportioned, should be similar to normal tissue, should be of custom size, should be easily placed, and should conceal any minor asymmetries. They use the McGhan implant MS51, which is a composite implant, soft on the outside and hard on the inside, with . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?