↓ Skip to main content

Thread-Lift Sutures

Overview of attention for article published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
71 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Thread-Lift Sutures
Published in
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, March 2018
DOI 10.1097/prs.0000000000004101
Pubmed ID
Authors

Haydar Aslan Gülbitti, Britt Colebunders, Ali Pirayesh, Dario Bertossi, Berend van der Lei

Abstract

In 2006, Villa et al. published a review article concerning the use of thread-lift sutures and concluded that the technique was still in its infancy but had great potential to become a useful and effective procedure for nonsurgical lifting of sagged facial tissues. As 11 years have passed, the authors now performed again a systematic review to determine the real scientific current state of the art on the use of thread-lift sutures. A systematic review was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines using the PubMed database and using the Medical Subject Headings search term "Rhytidoplasty." "Rhytidoplasty" and the following entry terms were included by this Medical Subject Headings term: "facelift," "facelifts," "face Lift," "Face Lifts," "Lift," "Face," "Lifts," "Platysmotomy," "Platysmotomies," "Rhytidectomy," "Rhytidectomies," "Platysmaplasty," "and "Platysmaplasties." The Medical Subject Headings term "Rhytidoplasty" was combined with the following search terms: "Barbed suture," "Thread lift," "APTOS," "Suture suspension," "Percutaneous," and "Silhouette suture." RefWorks was used to filter duplicates. Three of the authors (H.A.G., B.C., and B.L.) performed the search independently. The initial search with all search terms resulted in 188 articles. After filtering the duplicates and the articles about open procedures, a total of 41 articles remained. Of these, the review articles, case reports, and letters to the editor were subsequently excluded, as were reports dealing with nonbarbed sutures, such as Vicryl and Prolene with Gore-Tex. This resulted in a total of 12 articles, seven additional articles since the five articles reviewed by Villa et al. The authors' review demonstrated that, within the past decade, little or no substantial evidence has been added to the peer-reviewed literature to support or sustain the promising statement about thread-lift sutures as made by Villa et al. in 2006 in terms of efficacy or safety. All included literature in the authors' review, except two studies, demonstrated at best a very limited durability of the lifting effect. The two positive studies were sponsored by the companies that manufacture the thread-lift sutures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 99 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 12%
Other 10 10%
Researcher 9 9%
Student > Postgraduate 8 8%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 30 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 52%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Engineering 3 3%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Physics and Astronomy 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 38 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 November 2020.
All research outputs
#1,972,742
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
#841
of 10,405 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,918
of 344,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
#34
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,405 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,853 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.