Abstract
Background
Blepharoptosis can not only affect facial appearance but physical and mental health as well. Traditional treatments require long recovery time and leave unpleasant scars. In this study, we explored a simple and effective way to correct mild, moderate blepharoptosis and analyzed the causes and precautions for postoperative complications.
Methods
From March 2014 to May 2017, patients presenting with mild or moderate bilateral or unilateral blepharoptosis underwent minimally invasive blepharoptosis correction using suspension of the conjoint fascial sheath of the levator and superior rectus. Mild blepharoptosis was corrected by 1 or 2 of loops suspension sutures, whereas moderate blepharoptosis was corrected by 3 or 5 loops. The postoperative evaluation, including the degree of correction or residual ptosis, asymmetry and presence of lagophthalmos, was performed after a minimum follow-up period of 9 months.
Results
Forty patients (55 eyelids) were included. The mean followed up period was 13.40 ± 4.60 months. Good results were seen in 48 ptosis eyes (87.27%). Double eyelid crease was formed simultaneously without an obvious wound. Two mild ptosis eyelids received a fair result, and 4 moderate ptosis eyelids improved to “mild ptosis.” The mean marginal reflex distance 1 significantly increased postoperatively.
Conclusion
Long-term follow-up indicates that minimally invasive conjoint fascial sheath suspension works well for mild and moderate ptosis. With its short recovery time, simultaneous double eyelid crease formation and long-lasting effect, the surgery is worth popularizing.
Level of Evidence IV
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.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Blepharoptosis is defined as an abnormally low-positioned upper eyelid margin in the primary gaze position, which results in the narrowing of the palpebral fissure and opening [1, 2]. The two main ways to achieve elevation of the upper lid are to shorten the levator palpebrae superioris or Muller’s muscle [3] or to carry out a brow/frontalis suspension procedure. For minimal ptosis, there are three viable options: Muller’s muscle-conjunctival resection [4, 5], Fasanella–Servat procedure [6], or levator aponeurotic repair. For moderate ptosis, the treatment of choice is levator aponeurotic repair [7, 8]. Severe ptosis requires some type of frontalis suspension [9]. However, some traditional techniques are over invasive, leaving an unpleasant scar and requiring long downtime. Therefore, many patients, particularly those with mild or moderate blepharoptosis, are reluctant to undergo ptosis surgery. To overcome these drawbacks, effective non-/minimal-invasive surgery is necessary.
The conjoint fascial sheath (CFS) is attached to the conjunctival fornix. It is located in the intermuscular space between the anterior one-third of the superior rectus and segment of levator which could be used to correct blepharoptosis. Holmstrom and Santanelli [10] first reported eyelid suspension to CFS can be applied to correct various types of ptosis, and since then, the effectiveness of this method has been reported by many scholars [11,12,13].
Herein, we would like to illustrate our technique of minimally invasive blepharoptosis correction using CFS suspension. The method corrects blepharoptosis and forms double eyelids at the same time. It requires less downtime and leaves no conspicuous scar on the eyelid. It is beneficial for candidates who desire no skin incision but have indications for levator aponeurotic surgery and do not present with excessive upper eyelid laxity. And we further analyze the causes of postoperative complications and suggest precautions to avoid them.
Patients and Methods
A total of 189 patients were treated from March 2014 to May 2017. The inclusion criteria are as follows: (1) no skin hooding, (2) no CFS suspension was conducted, and (3) minimal follow-up period of 9 months. Before the surgery, the distance between the uppermost point of the cornea and the lower margin of the upper eyelid, levator function and margin reflex distance 1 (MRD1) [14] were measured at the clinics. The corneal diameter was also measured. The mean corneal diameter among Chinese is 11.26 mm [15], and the MRD1 was adjusted based on this mean corneal length. Patients with MRD1 of 3 mm or greater were defined to have mild ptosis, while patients with MRD1 of 1 to 3 mm were defined to have moderate ptosis, and those with MRD1 of 1 mm or less were defined to have severe ptosis. Patients with mild and moderate ptosis are favorable candidates for correction with our suture method. Patients with severe ptosis will require a more extensive procedure to achieve desirable correction.
The postoperative evaluation was performed after a minimum follow-up period of 9 months. During the follow-up, the evaluation criteria are based on (1) the existence of blepharoptosis and severity; (2) symmetry: the difference in MRD1 in 2 eyes is less than 0.5 mm; (3) double eyelid line; (4) satisfaction of doctor and patients. Specifically, surgeries with complete correction of ptosis, symmetric eyes, beautiful and smooth eyelid line and satisfaction by both patients and doctors are considered to have good results. Secondly, the ptosis is improved but not completely corrected, or the double eyelid line becomes shallow or disappears, asymmetric eyes, and one of the doctors or patients is unsatisfied are considered fair results. Lastly, ptosis restored to the preoperative state and surgery results were not satisfactory to both doctors and patients are defined as a poor result. Measurement at the last follow-up visit was used for comparison.
Surgical Design and Technique
With the patient in an upright position, the degree of ptosis on two eyelids was compared, and the amount of ptosis correction needed was established. Specifically, for patients with unilateral blepharoptosis, by lifting the ptotic eye, we eliminated the effect of increased innervation [16]. Then, we designed the height of the eyelid on the ptotic side according to the contralateral normal eyelid, i.e., the position of ptotic upper eyelid margin was 1 to 2 mm higher than the normal side, which was considered the ideal level. The width of the new double eyelid crease on the ptotic eye was 1 mm shorter than the normal eye because the muscle strength of the ptotic eye was weaker than that of the normal eye and the crease tended to be wider. For patients with bilateral blepharoptosis, the creases were designed at the same height.
Design for Mild Blepharoptosis Correction
For mild blepharoptosis, 1 or 2 suspension sutures were applied (Fig. 1). In the one-suspension method, one vertical line was drawn from the lash line to the lower border of the eyebrow corresponding to the center of the pupil. The intersection (point A) of the supratarsal crease line and the vertical line was determined as the incisional slit. In the two-suspension method, two vertical lines were drawn from the lash line to the lower border of the eyebrow corresponding to the medial and lateral corneal limbus determining two incisional slits (point B and C).
Design for Moderate Blepharoptosis Correction
For moderate blepharoptosis, 3 or 5 suspension sutures were applied (Fig. 1). The design of the three-suspension method was the combination of one and two suspension sutures, whereas two vertical lines were drawn 5 mm medially or laterally to point B and C, determining another two incisional slits (point D and E) for the five-suspension method.
Surgical Technique
After confirming the markings, 1% lidocaine with 0.005% epinephrine was infiltrated in and around the surgical site. The skin at the marked points on the eyelid was penetrated with no. 11 blade to make minor slits less than 1 mm in length in which the suspension sutures were enfolded at the end of the operation.
Turning the upper eyelid inside out, a 5/0 nylon suture was applied at the upper margin of the central part of the tarsus and suspended in the anterior superior direction. This suspension provided exposure of the fornix of the superior conjunctiva, making subsequent procedures easy to perform.
Patients were asked to downgaze, and the superior conjunctival fornix (SCF) was identified. No. 6-0 nylon suture (with needles attached to both ends) was inserted into the CFS at point a and passed through the soft tissue 1–2 mm, then exits at point b (Fig. 2). The suture was again introduced into the CFS at point b and routed toward point c at the depth between the levator aponeurosis and the Müller’s muscle (Fig. 3). Likewise, the needle at the other end was inserted into CFS at point a and routed toward point c. Strained both ends of the suture, and a dimple appeared on the conjunctiva, indicating the success of suspension (Fig. 4).
Then, the two needles were inserted at point c of the conjunctiva. After piercing through the tarsus, the needles exited from the minor slit previously made. Then, the thread was tied into a slipknot. After finishing other suspension sutures, patients were asked to sit up to evaluate the position. Then, the thread was tightened until the tarsus was elevated to the ideal level: in bilateral surgery, lid margins are placed at or 1 mm below the superior limbus. In unilateral surgery, the margin of the ptotic lid is placed 1–2 mm higher than that of the contralateral lid. Then, the thread was knotted and buried inside the minor slit of the upper eyelid. The 5-0 nylon suture is removed. No suture needs to be applied to close the slit.
Statistical Analysis
Study data are presented as means ± standard deviations. IBM SPSS Version 21.0 software (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY) was used for statistical analysis. A paired-sample t test and a Chi-square test were used to determine the statistical significance.
Results
Forty patients met the inclusion criteria, and the basic information is summarized in Table 1. Thirteen males and eighteen females received the operation. Patient ages ranged from 13 to 35 years (23.75 ± 5.44). Of these, 24 patients did not receive any surgery before, whereas 16 patients had undergone a surgical correction and required further treatment due to poor correction or recurrence. Eyelid ptosis was bilateral in 15 patients and unilateral in 25. Thus, a total of 55 eyelids were corrected. Preoperatively, 28 eyes were diagnosed as mild ptosis, whereas 27 eyes were diagnosed as moderate ptosis. The mean follow-up period was 13.40 ± 4.60 months.
Twenty-six (92.86%) of the twenty-eight eyelids with mild ptosis returned to “normal,” whereas two eyelids received a fair result. Of the 27 eyelids with moderate ptosis, 22 eyelids (81.49%) improved to “normal,” while 4 eyelids improved to “mild ptosis” (Figs. 5, 6, 7). One eyelid with moderate ptosis which had 3 suspension sutures observed overcorrection 5 days postoperatively. We removed one suspension suture and a 1-year follow-up showed a satisfying outcome. The poor result was observed in one moderate ptosis eyelid, whose double eyelid fold shallowed and underwent levator aponeurosis resection 2 months after the primary surgery. No significant difference was shown between mild and moderate ptosis in terms of operation outcome, indicating comparable effectiveness of this method in treating mild and moderate ptosis (Table 2). The mean MRD1 increased from 2.64 ± 0.85 mm preoperatively to 3.79 ± 0.80 mm postoperatively, which was statistically significant (P < 0.001) (Table 3).
Discussion
CFS, a thin transparent fascia wrapping the posterior half of the levator, is gradually thickened backward and fused with the upper portion of the aponeurosis sheath surrounding the superior rectus. Because of its tough and compact structure, it could be a dynamic scaffold to which the drooping tarsus may be suspended. When opening the eye, under oculomotor nerve innervation, the levator with insufficient but partial strength contracted at a high position; meanwhile, the superior rectus caused the CFS to shift upward when the globe turned upward [11, 17]. By suspending the tarsus to the CFS, both of these forces are transmitted to the tarsal plate through the CFS.
Previously, many surgeons used CFS to correct blepharoptosis in open methods. Although the ptosis was corrected, it required prolonged recovery time and left behind a conspicuous scar [13, 18]. So it is suitable for severe blepharoptosis. For mild-to-moderate ptosis or postoperative ptosis (corrected by other methods) that requires minor adjustment, minimally invasive surgical procedures may be more acceptable [19].
The minimally invasive surgery suspends the upper eyelid to the CFS. In the early stage, the suture effect of pulling and fixing is the main force. Once the scar forms a stable adhesion in the later stage, the effect of correction is long lasting. Since between the CFS and the tarsal plate, there are conjunctiva, levator and Müller muscle, the distance between them can only be narrowed by tension suspension suture but can hardly adhere tightly. Therefore, this method is not appropriate for severe ptosis.
In addition to the minimal incision and insignificant trauma, this operation can be adjusted flexibly during the operation, i.e., the upper eyelid position can be modified by tuning the stretching force and the number of suspension sutures. For mild ptosis or eyelid asymmetry, implanting one or two suspension sutures can achieve the desired results. For moderate ptosis or those who were not satisfied with previous surgery, suspension sutures could be added to 3 to 5. In addition, the dynamic force consisting of the levator and superior rectus and conducted by the CFS well accord with the physiological and biodynamic characteristics of the upper eyelid. Thus, the upper eyelid adheres well to the globe, and the period of eyelid lag is short after the operation. The incidence of exposed keratitis is extremely low, and the discomfort of the patients was significantly reduced.
The traditional anterior levator aponeurotic approach uses full incision, resulting in more bleeding and edema, which interferes with intraoperative observation and requires a long recovery time [20]. Moreover, simple levator plication may induce recurrence [21]. By combining levator aponeurosis and Muller muscle plication with levator sheath advancement, Byun et al. [22] reported greater improvement in MRD1 than levator aponeurosis and Muller muscle plication alone, indicating that extra tension from the levator sheath, an eyelid-elevating structure, can promote the postoperative effect. But its long-term surgical effect has not been proven nor had the tensile strength of levator. Besides, the incision and dissection areas are still larger than non-/minimal-incisional approaches.
Levator aponeurosis–Muller muscle complex advancement has been claimed to be an effective technique for young patients with mild-to-moderate blepharoptosis [23,24,25]. These minimally invasive procedures can be combined with a double eyelid fold operation. But the correction is beset by the question of longevity and accuracy of repair [22] because the suture only narrows the distance between the tarsus and the distal part of the levator by “accordion pleated like” multilayer folding adhesion of the levator and the Müller’s muscle, rather than suspending the muscle to a fixed, stable structure [26].
Ahn et al. used a one-/two- loop CFS suspension technique to correct blepharoptosis. In their method, CFS is positioned at the apex of the cone. The needle pierces and exits CFS at the same point, suspending little CFS tissue [12]. The suspension suture may burst CFS tissue. Thus, shortened tissue release prematurely, and the adhesion that has not yet been finalized is abandoned halfway. At this stage, there is no reliable adhesion above, once the scar can no longer resist the daily frequent eyelid movement, it will loosen and lead to failure. Meanwhile, in addition to the suspension suture applied to the crease fold level, the “triangle single-knot suture” technique was used to create a double eyelid crease [12]. In such a case, the overladen eyelid may lead to immunological rejection or ptosis aggravation.
In our method, the needle transversely passes through CFS 1–2 mm. By expanding the suspension area, it reduces the cutting pressure of the suture line and prevents bursting CFS. In addition, a double eyelid crease was formed simultaneously without the need for extra blepharoplasty. Besides lifting the ptotic eyelid, we design the new fold on the ptotic side 1 mm narrower than the normal side. On the one hand, it alleviates the preload. The ptotic eyelid elevates due to CFS suspension and less preload; on the other hand, soon after the surgery, as the lesion eye being corrected, the tarsus on the normal side drops a bit and the width of normal eyelid fold widens. By designing the fold of the ptotic side 1 mm narrower than the normal side, the bilateral eyelids become more symmetrical after the treatment effect gradually decreases.
We also reflect on the complications and possible preventions: firstly, insufficient or ineffective correction, which might be caused by adrenaline interference. False relief of blepharoptosis degree interferes with observation, leading to inadequate elevation. To avoid such a phenomenon, little or no epinephrine should be added. Secondly, overcorrection and upper eyelid retraction. Intraoperative anesthesia, edema or hematoma causes difficulty in lifting the upper eyelid, which will interfere with surgeon judgment, resulting in overladen with suspension. Therefore, after local anesthesia infiltration, if the eye opens abnormally, surgeons had better stop the operation. Lastly, since CFS and the superior rectus are adjacent and related, the suture should not be too deep to avoid affecting the function of the superior rectus muscle.
In terms of limitations, as a retrospective study, our study lacks a control group, and it would be more persuasive if there is a gold standard for blepharoptosis correction that could serve as a control. Furthermore, larger sample size and longer follow-up term, across a 3-year or longer period, would contribute to the verification of the postoperative effect, which is especially necessary when comparing with other surgeries.
Conclusion
The minimally invasive suspension of CFS can effectively correct mild and moderate blepharoptosis and form double eyelid simultaneously. The surgery involves little trauma, short recovery time and the satisfactory postoperative effect is worth popularizing.
References
Finsterer J (2003) Ptosis: causes, presentation, and management. Aesthetic Plast Surg 27:193–204
Richards HS, Jenkinson E, Rumsey N, Harrad RA (2017) Pre-operative experiences and post-operative benefits of ptosis surgery: a qualitative study. Orbit 36:147–153
Khooshabeh R, Baldwin HC (2008) Isolated Muller’s muscle resection for the correction of blepharoptosis. Eye (Lond) 22:267–272
Bautista SA, Wladis EJ, Schultze RL (2018) Quantitative assessment of dry eye parameters after Muller’s muscle-conjunctival resection. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg 34:562–564
Ben Simon GJ, Lee S, Schwarcz RM, McCann JD, Goldberg RA (2007) Muller’s muscle-conjunctival resection for correction of upper eyelid ptosis: relationship between phenylephrine testing and the amount of tissue resected with final eyelid position. Arch Facial Plast Surg 9:413–417
Pang NK, Newsom RW, Oestreicher JH, Chung HT, Harvey JT (2008) Fasanella–Servat procedure: indications, efficacy, and complications. Can J Ophthalmol 43:84–88
Saonanon P, Sithanon S (2018) External levator advancement versus Muller muscle-conjunctival resection for aponeurotic blepharoptosis: a randomized clinical trial. Plast Reconstr Surg 141:213e–219e
Parsa FD, Wolff DR, Parsa NN, Elahi EE (2001) Upper eyelid ptosis repair after cataract extraction and the importance of Hering’s test. Plast Reconstr Surg 108:1527–1536 discussion 37–8
Kokubo K, Katori N, Hayashi K et al (2016) Frontalis suspension with an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene sheet for congenital ptosis repair. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 69:673–678
Holmstrom H, Santanelli F (2002) Suspension of the eyelid to the check ligament of the superior fornix for congenital blepharoptosis. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 36:149–156
Hwang K, Shin YH, Kim DJ (2008) Conjoint fascial sheath of the levator and superior rectus attached to the conjunctival fornix. J Craniofac Surg 19:241–245
Ahn TJ, Kim JH, Lee EI et al (2017) Nonincisional conjoint fascial sheath suspension: a novel technique for minimally invasive blepharoptosis correction. Ann Plast Surg 79:334–340
Santanelli F, Paolini G, Renzi LF, Longo B, Pagnoni M, Holmstrom H (2011) Correction of myopathic blepharoptosis by check ligament suspension: clinical evaluation of 89 eyelids. J Plast Surg Hand Surg 45:194–199
Putterman AM (2012) Margin reflex distance (MRD) 1, 2, and 3. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg 28:308–311
Hickson-Curran S, Brennan NA, Igarashi Y, Young G (2014) Comparative evaluation of Asian and white ocular topography. Optom Vis Sci 91:1396–1405
Chen AD, Lai YW, Lai HT et al (2016) The impact of Hering’s law in blepharoptosis: literature review. Ann Plast Surg 76(Suppl 1):S96–S100
Ettl A, Priglinger S, Kramer J, Koornneef L (1996) Functional anatomy of the levator palpebrae superioris muscle and its connective tissue system. Br J Ophthalmol 80:702–707
Lee EI, Ahn TJ (2014) Mild ptosis correction with the stitch method during incisional double fold formation. Arch Plast Surg 41:71–76
Shimizu Y, Nagasao T, Asou T (2010) A new non-incisional correction method for blepharoptosis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 63:2004–2012
Scuderi N, Chiummariello S, De Gado F, Alfano C, Scuderi G, Recupero SM (2008) Surgical correction of blepharoptosis using the levator aponeurosis-Muller’s muscle complex readaptation technique: a 15-year experience. Plast Reconstr Surg 121:71–78
Cetinkaya A, Brannan PA (2008) Ptosis repair options and algorithm. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 19:428–434
Byun JS, Hwang K, Lee SY, Kim HT, Kim K (2017) Levator aponeurosis and Muller muscle plication reinforced with levator sheath advancement for blepharoptosis correction. J Craniofac Surg 28:1849–1851
Park JW, Kang MS, Nam SM, Kim YB (2015) Blepharoptosis correction with buried suture method. Ann Plast Surg 74:152–156
Lee JH, Nam SM, Kim YB (2015) Blepharoptosis correction: levator aponeurosis-Muller muscle complex advancement with three partial incisions. Plast Reconstr Surg 135:388–395
Ma CJ, Lu F, Liu L (2018) A modified double eyelid plastic surgery method: continuous buried suture method accompanied by simultaneous correction of mild blepharoptosis. Aesthetic Plast Surg 42(6):1565–1570. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-018-1180-4
Park DH, Baik BS (2008) Advancement of the Muller muscle-levator aponeurosis composite flap for correction of blepharoptosis. Plast Reconstr Surg 122:140–142
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
Ethical Approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the clinical research committee of plastic surgery hospital (12100000400266049B) and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all patients and can be seen by the editors.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhou, J., Chen, W., Qi, Z. et al. Minimally Invasive Conjoint Fascial Sheath Suspension for Blepharoptosis Correction. Aesth Plast Surg 43, 956–963 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-019-01382-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-019-01382-w