A Systematic Review: Fibrin Glue in Drainless Rhytidoplasty.

The following questions guided the study: Can the use of fibrin glue in drainless rhytidoplasty reduce hematoma prevalence, seroma prevalence increase patient satisfaction or decrease the length of hospital in the adult population compared with standard treatment? The following inclusion and exclusion criteria apply: The procedure performed was rhytidoplasty for both groups. Participants were limited to adults who did not have any other procedure performed during the study. The intervention consisted of the use of fibrin glue without drains compared to the control group, in which drains and/or pressure dressing were applied. Databases: clinicaltrials.gov, MEDLINE, COCHRANE, mRCT, PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Embase, VHL, GHL were searched on 03/25/2023 by 2 different investigators. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0 was used. Five studies were included with a total number of 1277 participants (2554 face sides). The cumulative hematoma rate was OR 0.47 (95% CI 0.26-0.84) in favor of using fibrin glue. Insufficient data were available to assess seroma rate, patient satisfaction, and length of hospital stay. The risk of study bias was judged to be low and moderate. The certainty for the use of fibrin sealant versus drainage is high and the importance of outcomes is rated as important in the GRADEpro GDT tool. Fibrin glue use is more beneficial comparing to drainage in patients undergoing rhytidectomy in terms of hematoma prevalence. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023421475).Level of Evidence I 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 .

Internet and Social Media as a Source of Information About Plastic Surgery: Comparison Between Public and Private Sector, A 2-center Study.

BACKGROUND: The popularity of social media among plastic surgeons and patients has increased in the last years. We conducted this study to explore the differences in patients' social media habits between public and private aesthetic plastic surgery practice. METHODS: A 2-cohort study was conducted in aesthetic plastic surgery clinic and public department of plastic and surgery by surveying consecutive first-time patients. RESULTS: Two hundred patients completed a 18-question survey at a private aesthetic plastic surgery clinic. The questionnaire was also filled by 113 patients at a public plastic surgery department. Facebook was the most popular social media platform in both groups. Word of mouth from other patients and the clinic's website were the most-valued source of information about the surgeon and surgical procedure for patients of both studied groups. Patients from the aesthetic group were mainly women from small towns; they were significantly younger and better educated and used Instagram more frequently than patients from public group. The aesthetic group patients focused significantly more often on the surgeon's credentials and on before and after photographs. They appreciated social media as a source of information for patients significantly more than public group patients who stated that social media were the worst source of information. CONCLUSIONS: Word of mouth from other patients remains the most-valued source of information about plastic surgery. However, proper use of social media and building online image in a professional manner can provide attract more patients to the aesthetic plastic surgery practice.