Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41156181›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025

Are We Underestimating Zygomaticus Variability in Midface Surgery?

Ingrid C Landfald, Łukasz Olewnik

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ingrid C LandfaldDepartment of Clinical Anatomy, Mazovian Academy in Plock, 09-402 Płock, Poland.ORCID 0009-0005-2374-5392
Łukasz OlewnikVARIANTIS Research Laboratory, 09-409 Płock, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The zygomaticus major and minor (ZMa/ZMi) are key determinants of smile dynamics and midface contour, yet they exhibit substantial morphological variability-including bifid or multibellied bellies, accessory slips, and atypical insertions. Such variants can alter force vectors, fat-compartment boundaries, and SMAS planes, increasing the risk of asymmetry, contour irregularities, or "joker smile" following facelifts, fillers, thread lifts, and smile reconstruction. To our knowledge, this is the first review to integrate the Landfald classification of ZMa/ZMi variants with a standardized dynamic imaging-based workflow for aesthetic and reconstructive midface procedures. We conducted a narrative literature synthesis of anatomical and imaging studies. Bifid or multibellied variants have been reported in up to 35% of cadaveric specimens. We synthesize anatomical, biomechanical, and imaging evidence (MRI, dynamic US, 3D analysis) to propose a practical protocol: (1) focused history and dynamic examination, (2) US/EMG mapping of contraction vectors, (3) optional high-resolution MRI for complex cases, and (4) individualized adjustment of surgical vectors, injection planes, and dosing. Procedure-specific adaptations are outlined for deep-plane releases, thread-lift trajectories, filler depth selection, and muscle-transfer orientation. We emphasize that standardizing preoperative dynamic mapping and adopting a "patient-specific mimetic profile" can enhance safety, predictability, and preservation of authentic expression, ultimately improving patient satisfaction across diverse midface interventions.

Indexed as

anatomical variationdynamic ultrasoundEMG mappingfaceliftLandfald classificationsmile reconstructionzygomaticus majorzygomaticus minor

Identifiers

PMID41156181
PMCPMC12565131

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.