Search

Background Aesthetic surgery fellowship applications were consolidated under the San Francisco Match in 2018. The impact of these changes on aesthetic program and applicant numbers had not yet been investigated. Objectives In this study we sought to evaluate changes in programs, positions, applications, match rates, and fill rates since aesthetic surgery joined the San Francisco Match. We also aimed to compare these trends to craniofacial surgery, microsurgery, and hand surgery fellowships over this same time period. Methods San Francisco and National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) match data for aesthetic, craniofacial, microsurgery, and hand fellowships were obtained from 2018 to 2022, and the number of applications, positions, programs, and successful matches were evaluated. Results The number of aesthetic fellowship positions increased from 17 to 41 (141%) over the period studied. This resulted in increased match rates and more unfilled positions. Over the same period, fellowship positions for craniofacial, hand, and microsurgery increased by 3.4%, 6%, and 2.5% respectively. There was no increase in applications to any postgraduate subspecialty, nor was there any change in the number of residents pursuing fellowship. Similarly, there was no change in the percentage of fellowship-bound residents applying to any given discipline. Conclusions The increase in aesthetic fellowship programs and positions did not generate an increase in applications. Applications to other plastic surgery subspecialties also failed to increase. Unlike aesthetic fellowships, their program numbers have remained stable. Given the limited fellowship applicant pool, our focus should be on enhancing the quality of existing aesthetic programs rather than continuing to increase the number of aesthetic positions. Level of Evidence: 3 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background In 2001, Elkwood and Matarasso published an American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) member survey detailing brow lift practice patterns. Interval changes in practice patterns have not been studied. Objectives The previous survey was revised to elucidate current trends in brow lift surgery. Methods A 34-question descriptive survey was distributed to a random group of 2360 ASPS members. Results were compared to the 2001 survey. Results A total of 257 responses were collected (11% response rate; ± 6% margin of error at 95% CI). The most frequent technique for the correction of brow ptosis in both surveys was the endoscopic approach. The use of hardware fixation has increased in endoscopic brow lifting, whereas the use of cortical tunnels has decreased. Although coronal brow lifting has decreased in frequency, hairline and isolated temporal lift have increased. Neuromodulators have replaced resurfacing techniques as the most common nonsurgical adjunct. Frequent use of neuromodulators has risen from 11.2% to 88.5%. Nearly 30% of current surgeons feel that neuromodulators have replaced formal brow lifting procedures to a significant degree. Conclusions In comparing the 2001 and current ASPS member survey there has been a clear transition to less invasive procedures over time. Although the endoscopic approach was the most popular means of forehead correction in both surveys, coronal brow lifting has decreased in frequency and the hairline and temporal approaches have increased. Neurotoxins have replaced laser resurfacing and chemical peeling methods as an adjunct, and in some cases replaced the invasive procedure entirely. Possible explanations for these findings will be discussed. Level of Evidence: 4 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]