2018
DOI: 10.1093/asj/sjy287
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Superficial Temporal Artery: Anatomical Map for Facial Reconstruction and Aesthetic Procedures

Abstract: Background The superficial temporal artery (STA), a terminal branch of the external carotid artery, supplies multiple regions of the scalp and face. Knowledge of the STA is important for reconstructive and aesthetic procedures of the head and face. Objectives The aim of this study was to map the STA in relation to anatomical landmarks. Methods Computed tomogr… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
36
0
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
2
36
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…There was no statistically significant difference between cadaveric (97.5% [95% CI: 95.1-99.2]) and radiological studies (94.7% [95% CI: 89.3-98.4]) in parietal branch prevalence. The diameter of the parietal branch was reported in six studies (622 arteries) and was 1.14 mm (95% CI: 1.12-1.17) with statistically significant larger values for cadaveric versus radiological studies (Table 5) (Chen et al, 1999;Kim et al, 2013;Koziej et al, 2018;Pinar & Govsa, 2006;Stock et al, 1980). The presence of frontal branch was described in 14 studies (1,072 arteries) (Table 4) (Fan et al, 2010;Imanishi et al, 2002;Kim et al, 2013;Kleintjes, 2007;Koziej et al, 2018;Lee et al, 2014;Lei et al, 2005;Marano et al, 1985;Medved et al, 2015;Mwachaka et al, 2010;Pinar & Govsa, 2006;Ricbourg et al, 1975;Stock et al, 1980;Tayfur et al, 2010).…”
Section: Meta-analysismentioning
confidence: 98%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…There was no statistically significant difference between cadaveric (97.5% [95% CI: 95.1-99.2]) and radiological studies (94.7% [95% CI: 89.3-98.4]) in parietal branch prevalence. The diameter of the parietal branch was reported in six studies (622 arteries) and was 1.14 mm (95% CI: 1.12-1.17) with statistically significant larger values for cadaveric versus radiological studies (Table 5) (Chen et al, 1999;Kim et al, 2013;Koziej et al, 2018;Pinar & Govsa, 2006;Stock et al, 1980). The presence of frontal branch was described in 14 studies (1,072 arteries) (Table 4) (Fan et al, 2010;Imanishi et al, 2002;Kim et al, 2013;Kleintjes, 2007;Koziej et al, 2018;Lee et al, 2014;Lei et al, 2005;Marano et al, 1985;Medved et al, 2015;Mwachaka et al, 2010;Pinar & Govsa, 2006;Ricbourg et al, 1975;Stock et al, 1980;Tayfur et al, 2010).…”
Section: Meta-analysismentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The characteristics of included studies are presented in Table 1. Of 21 included studies, eight were based on radiological imaging (Bettoni et al, 2018;Cobb, Galvin, & Gonzalez, 2016;Doscher et al, 2015;Kim, Jung, Chang, & Choi, 2013;Koziej et al, 2018;Kuruoglu, Cokluk, Marangoz, & Aydin, 2015;Manoli et al, 2016;Medved et al, 2015), 12 were based on cadaveric anatomical studies (Chen et al, 1999;Fan, Zhang, Yang, & Huang, 2010;Imanishi, Nakajima, Minabe, Chang, & Aiso, 2002;Kawashima et al, 2005;Kleintjes, 2007;Lee et al, 2014;Lei et al, 2005;Marano, Fischer, Gaines, & Sonntag, 1985;Mwachaka, Sinkeet, & OgengO, 2010;Pinar & Govsa, 2006;Ricbourg, Mitz, & Lassau, 1975;Tayfur, Edizer, & Magden, 2010), and one study included both methodologies (Stock et al, 1980).…”
Section: F I G U R Ementioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations