Objective The most promising facial region for inducing pan‐facial effects is the temporal region. The temple displays signs of facial aging itself which include temporal volume loss and increased visibility of the temporal crest, the temporal vasculature, the lateral orbital rim, and the upper zygomatic arch. The objective of this article is to provide a detailed review of temple anatomy pertaining to routinely performed temporal injection techniques, their expected esthetic outcomes as well as the intendant advantages, disadvantages, and procedure pearls. Materials and Methods This narrative review is based on the clinical experience of the authors treating the temporal region for esthetic purposes. The postulated outcome of each technique was observed during the routine clinical practice of the authors. Results The temporal region is based on a bony platform consisting of the parietal, frontal, sphenoid, and temporal bones. The overlying soft tissues are arranged in layers which contain the temporal neurovascular structures. The temporal soft tissues consist of 10 parallel layers which vary in their thickness depending on age‐related influences. Six different techniques will be addressed, which include subdermal and interfascial techniques for volumizing, low and high supraperiosteal techniques for volumizing, and supraauricular and temporal lifting techniques. Conclusion This narrative provides a detailed anatomic overview of the temporal region and describes each commonly performed injection technique with respect to anatomy, esthetic outcome, as well as potential pearls and pitfalls. It is hoped that the description contained herein may guide esthetic practitioners toward safer and more natural outcomes when treating the face.

Recent studies have shown a relationship between lymphoma and breast implants. We performed a meta-analysis about this problem. We found 80 cases, 50 of which were reported in the United States (62.5%). The average age was 52 years. The average time between breast implant surgery and lymphoma was 11 years. Forty-one percent of the breast implants were silicone, 42.19% were saline and 15.8% were unknown. The coverage of the breast implants was texturized in 21.3% and unknown in 78%. The most common brands were McGhan and Mentor. In 72.6% of the cases, the brand was unknown. The clinical findings were seroma (67.33%), nodes (13.8%), mass (22.1%), other (11.7%) and unknown (32%). The most common surgical treatment was capsulectomy and breast implant removal. In 97% of the cases, ALK was negative and 3% were positive. The most common marker was CD30. The most common chemotherapy regimen was CHOP. Three patients died. Two of the patients had extracapsular extension of the disease and breast cancer history. Lymphoma related with the breast implant was a different type of lymphoma, and in most cases, it was less aggressive. The disease was confined to the capsule. Few patients developed aggressive disease, were extracapsular and showed bad prognosis.

Background: Cosmetic treatment of the forehead using neuromodulators is challenging. To avoid adverse events, the underlying anatomy has to be understood and thoughtfully targeted. Clinical observations indicate that eyebrow ptosis can be avoided if neuromodulators are injected in the upper forehead, despite the frontalis muscle being the primary elevator. Methods: Twenty-seven healthy volunteers (11 men and 16 women) with a mean age of 37.5 ± 13.7 years (range, 22 to 73 years) and of diverse ethnicity (14 Caucasians, four African Americans, three Asians, and six of Middle Eastern descent) were enrolled. Skin displacement vector analyses were conducted on maximal frontalis muscle contraction to calculate magnitude and direction of forehead skin movement. Results: In 100 percent of investigated volunteers, a bidirectional movement of the forehead skin was observed: the skin of the lower forehead moved cranially, whereas the skin of the upper forehead moved caudally. Both movements converged at a horizontal forehead line termed the line of convergence, or C-line. The position of the C-line relative to the total height of the forehead was 60.9 ± 10.2 percent in men and 60.6 ± 9.6 percent in women (p = 0.941). Independent of sex, the C-line was located at the second horizontal forehead line when counting from superior to inferior (men, n = 2; women, n = 2). No difference across ethnicities was detected. Conclusions: The identification of the C-line may potentially guide practitioners toward more predictable outcomes for forehead neuromodulator injections. Injections above the C-line could mitigate the risk of neuromodulator-induced brow ptosis.