Available via license: CC BY-NC 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Subperiosteal chin augmentation with hyaluronic acid
filler in patients with a small chin
Kyoung-Jin Kang, MD, PhD, FKCCS
1
, Choong-Yee Chai, MS
2
1
Seoul Cosmetic Surgery Clinic, Busan, Rep. of Korea,
2
Korean College of Cosmetic Surgery, Busan, Rep. of Korea
Received August 10 2017, Revised November 21 2017, Accepted November 21 2017
Corresponding author: Kyoung-Jin Kang, Seoul Cosmetic Surgery Clinic, 10th floor, New Nampo B/D #4, Gudeok-ro 34 Beon-gil, Jung-gu, Busan 48954,
Rep. of Korea
Tel: 82-51-247-7776, Fax: 82-51-248-7765, E-mail: mdkjkang@hanmail.net
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0), which
permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright ⓒ 2017. Korean Society of Korean Cosmetic Surgery (KSKCS) Korean College of Cosmetic Surger y (KCCS).
Introduction
Patients with a small chin have typical features, such as a
wide and short face, protruded mouth, chin drooping, exposed
teeth due to incomplete lip closure, bunching and pouting, and
wrinkles and dimpling of the skin [1]. In addition, many patients
may experience dryness of the mouth because of incomplete
mouth closure during sleep.
Sliding genioplasty, autologous or allograft implantation, and
filler injection have been performed as representative treat-
ment modalities for the small chin [2]. Among these, the filler
procedure is commonly used for chin augmentation because of
Original Article
J Cosmet Med 2017;1(2):120-129
https://doi.org/10.25056/JCM.2017.1.2.120
pISSN 2508-8831, eISSN 2586-0585
Background: For correction of small chin, surgical genioplasty, allograft implantation, and injectable filler have been widely used.
Among these, the injectable fillers is a simple, non-invasive procedure that has minimal downtime and low risk of complications. It has
been commonly injected at intradermal, subdermal, submuscular and supraperiosteal layer. However, common complications such as
nodules, bumps, lumps, migration, asymmetry, overcorrection, and chin ptosis frequently happened.
Objective: The main objective of this study was injecting filler into sub-periosteal layer in a small chin and evaluated its effect and
incidence of complications.
Methods: A total of 14 subjects aged between 33 and 64 years had been performed Elravie
®
hyaluronic acid filler injection
subperiosteally and Medytoxin
®
as a botulinum toxin treatment intramuscularly. Morphological change were observed through the
photos. Changes of proportion of lower 1/3 face, Modified Legan’s angle, and open gap distance of lips were measured. Follow-up
patient satisfaction surveys were conducted from 2 to 3 weeks.
Results: Proportion of lower face was significantly changed that the ratio of upper and middle 1/3 were decreased (5.26%, 3.85%)
and the ratio of lower 1/3 was increased (8.33%). Modified Legan’s angle was significantly decreased (37.4±16.5%). Open gap
distance between lips was decreased (66.2±17.9%) and dry mouth was significantly decreased. Lower facial contour was changed
from round shape to elliptical shape and mouth looked smaller and less protruded. Upper lip was everted, but lower lip was inverted.
Perioral wrinkles, labio-mandibular folds, and mental dimples were significantly decreased. There was no significant incidence of
common complications including chin ptosis.
Conclusion: Subperiosteal filler injection is easy, safe and effective in improvement of small chin and interestingly, showed additional
beneficial effects such as improvement of dry mouth, lips contour, and perioral wrinkles.
Level of Evidence: IV
Keywords: subperiosteal chin augmentation; injectable filler; chin ptosis; dry mouth
Subperiosteal chin augmentation with hyaluronic acid filler in patients with a small chin
www.jcosmetmed.org
121
the minimal down time and fewer complications. Moreover, the
recent trend of non-invasive cosmetic surgery, rather than the
perfection and persistence of the procedure’s treatment effects,
may have contributed to its popularity.
Usually, fillers are injected into the intradermal, subdermal,
and supraperiosteal layers to correct small chins [3] and both
sharp needles and blunt cannulas were inserted at three points
of the entry site [4]. Apart from common complications, such as
swelling, redness, tenderness, bruising, filler migration, bumps
or lumps, asymmetry, irregularities, and nodules, relatively seri-
ous complications, such as chin drooping have also occurred
frequently [5]. Among these, the mechanism of chin drooping is
as follows: when the filler is injected into the intradermal, sub-
dermal, and supraperiosteal layer in a patient who has a small
and flat chin, chin drooping can occur more easily because of
decreased skeletal support for the chin soft tissue. This is caused
by increased soft tissue weight from the injected filler.
This hypothesis is supported by some studies that reported
that facial sagging was caused not only by soft tissue aging, but
also by skeletal deformities [6,7], and that it can be improved
by the modification of volume restoration from the bone and
soft tissues [8]. Thus, a small chin can easily lead to incomplete
mouth closure and teeth exposure when the mentalis muscle
is relaxed. Therefore, most patients with a small chin tend to
excessively contract the mentalis muscle to close their mouth.
This is the main cause of bunching, pouting, and soft tissue
deformities, such as chin wrinkles, mentalis dimpling [9], and
loss of the submental fat pad. Further, the opening of the mouth
during sleep due to mentalis relaxation can lead to drying of the
mouth.
Finally, the authors suggest that subperiosteal filler injection
is the fundamental solution to the above complications. It is
expected to produce not only chin augmentation, but also de-
crease the gap between the lips by increasing skeletal support.
Additionally, the authors used a sharp needle and six to eight
points of entry for the exact and even placement of the filler.
Botulinum toxin treatment was also administered to prevent
filler migration postoperatively.
To evaluate the effect of the subperiosteal filler augmentation,
the change in the lower one-third of the facial proportion, mod-
ified Legan’s angle, gap between the lips, and the morphologi-
cal changes of the chin, lips, and perioral area were evaluated
from the pre- and postoperative photographs of the patients.
Materials and methods
Patients and follow-up
Filler chin augmentation was performed for 14 patients with
a small chin who visited the Seoul Cosmetic Surgery Clinic
between March and June 2017. The effect of the augmentation
was assessed 2–3 weeks after the procedure.
Preoperative marking
Three vertical lines (a, b and c) were first marked, two hori-
zontal lines (e and f) were made separately after touching
the Superior and inferior borders of the mandible with the
fingertips. The intersections of the three vertical and two hori-
zontal lines were used as the entry points (i.e., 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and
6). Subsequently, the naturally expanded semi-circular lateral
areas were located while pinching the soft tissue of the medial
commissure with the thumb and index finger. A black-colored
outline, like a school bus track, was made for the chin augmen-
tation. The labiomental depression was marked and its entry
abcd
e
f
A
B
12 3
456
78
Fig. 1. Preoperative markings for sequential augmentation of
filler injection (SAFI). (A) Schematic drawing for determination of
injection area and entry site, (B) Practical marking for filler injection
in the state of the mentalis muscle in repose. The numbers (i.e., 1 to
8) represent the entry sites. Upper/lower white dotted lines indicate
surface marking lines from superior/inferior border of mandible
respectively. (a) and (c) Two vertical black-colored dotted lines
indicate the boundary line between the medial and lateral part of
vermillion, (b) A vertical black-colored dotted line indicates the
center of medial part of the vermillion, (d) A black-colored dotted
line indicates lower vermillion border, and (e) Transverse line on
the skin corresponds to muco-buccal fold in oral cavity, and (f)
Transverse line for inferior boder of mandible, Upper and lower
blue arrows indicate the direction of needle insertion and bevel’s
orientation.
Kyoung-Jin Kang, Choong-Yee Chai
122
www.jcosmetmed.org
points were numbers 7 and 8 (Fig. 1).
Anesthesia
0.1 ml of 2% lidocaine solution mixed with epinephrine
(1:100,000) was injected into the eight entry sites from the peri-
osteum to the skin, retrogradely.
Filler and botulinum toxin injection
In the first session of the filler injection, an average of 2.43±0.73
ml of Elravie® Premier Ultravolume-L (hyaluronic acid 23mg/
ml, 0.3% lidocaine, Humedix Co., Ltd., Anyang, Republic of
Korea) were injected. Where needed, a second session was per-
formed at least 2–3 weeks later. Subperiosteal bolus injection
of the filler was performed through the entry sites in the order
of 1 to 6. Thereafter, the filler was injected into the labiomental
depression through the other entry sites (7 and 8) (Fig. 1A). A
23 gauge sharp needle was inserted into the 2-cc syringe of the
filler. The needle was approached towards the central zone of
the medial commissure of the lower lip, touching the bone di-
rectly, and the filler was slowly injected after checking intravas-
cular injection by withdrawing the plunger. At any entry site, the
bevel of the needle can be oriented upwards, downwards or lat-
eralwards according to the purpose of the injection (projection,
lengthening, or widening of the chin). Medytoxin® (10 units/0.5
cc of Bo tulinum toxin; Meditox Inc., Cheongju, Republic of
Korea) was injected into the mentalis muscle to prevent postop-
erative migration of the filler. A 3M tape was used to fix the chin
for 3 days postoperatively, and cold compression was applied
for 2 days.
Measurement
Proportion of the lower one-third of the face
Changes in the length of each zone (I, II, and III) were mea-
sured from the pre- and postoperative photographs and the
change of the pre- and postoperative ratio was also calculated
(Fig. 2A).
Modified Legan’s angle
To evaluate the anterior projection of the soft tissues, we
measured the modified Legan’s angle [10], which is the angle
between the line from the nasion to the subnasale and the line
from the pogonion to the subnasale (Fig. 2B).
The gap between the lips
The gap between the upper and lower lips when the mentalis
muscle is relaxed was measured before and after the procedure
using a ruler (Fig. 2C).
Morphological changes of the chin, lips, and perioral area
From the pre- and postoperative photographs, contour
changes of the chin, lips, nasolabial folds, and perioral wrinkles,
when the corner of the mouth is elevated, were also observed.
Dry mouth
Two to three weeks after the procedure, patients who had
subjective symptoms such as dryness of the mouth prior to the
procedure were examined to ascertain whether the symptom
had improved. We assumed the perception of the symptom
B C
Sn
P
L
N
I
II
III
A
Sn
St
Lm
M
Fig. 2. Measurements of lower face pro-
portion, modified Legan’s angle and open
gap between upper and lower lips. (A) Fron-
tal view of facial proportion, (B) Lateral
view of Legan’s angle, (C) Frontal view
of measurement of gap distance in the
status of mentalis muscle in repose. Zone
I, II, and III represent the upper, middle
and lower 1/3 of the lower face, Sn, sub-
nalsale; St, stomion; Lm, labiomental crea-
se; Mt, menton; N, nasion; P, pogonion;
L, Legan’s angle.
Subperiosteal chin augmentation with hyaluronic acid filler in patients with a small chin
www.jcosmetmed.org
123
before the procedure to be 100%; thus, the perception of the
symptom after the procedure was recorded as percentages.
Results
Statistical analysis
Amount of Botulinum toxin and hyaluronic acid filler used
Ten units of Medytoxin® and Elravie® (mean, 2.43±0.73 ml)
Premier Ultravolume-L were injected. For chin projection, more
amount of filler was injected into 1, 2, and 3 entry sites than into
4, 5, 6 entry sites (Table 1).
Proportion of the lower one-third of the face
The total length of the lower face was increased (p=0.003).
Among the zones, only the increase in the length of zone III was
statistically significant (p<0.05). The ratio of the length of each
zone to the total length of the lower face showed significant
changes in zone I and III (p=0.001 and p=0.000, respectively).
However, there was no statistically significant change in zone II
(Table 2, 3).
Modified Legan’s angle
As shown in the photograph, the decrease in Legan’s angle
indicated an increase in the anterior projection of the soft tis-
sues of the small chin. As seen in the figures, this angle was
significantly reduced in all patients, after the procedure, by an
average of 37.1±16.71% (Table 4).
The gap between the lips
The gap between the lips significantly reduced in all cases, af-
ter the procedure (Table 4). In this study, the rate of decrease in
the gap between the lips after the procedure was 66.2±17.89%.
Dry mouth
Preoperatively, eight of the patients had subjective symptom
of dry mouth when they woke up in the morning. Among them,
one patient had no improvement (0%) after the procedure,
however, the seven other patients experienced a significant de-
crease in the symptom (77.14±20.59%) (Table 4).
Complications
Swelling and pressure pain occurred in all cases but disap-
peared within one week. Bleeding and bruising at the entry sites
of the lidocaine injection occurred in two patients. Moreover,
asymmetry occurred, which was not caused by over-correction
or hypo-correction but was caused by the difference in soft tis-
sue thickness, which had been reduced by excessive mentalis
muscle contraction before the procedure. The subjective opin-
ions of patients ‘my chin became too big after the procedure’,
Table 1. Amount of Hyaluronic acid filler and botulinum toxin used for chin and prejowl area
Number
of cases
(n)
Sex Age Medytoxin®
(units)a)
Elravie® premier ultravolume-L hyaluronic acid fillerb)
Total
amount
(ml)
Injected amount to each entry site (ml) Injected
amount to prejowl
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 & 8 Right Left
1 F 60 10 2.1 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.2
2 F 33 10 2.5 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.5 0.6
3 M 40 10 2 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.4
4 F 34 10 2 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.4
5 F 61 10 2 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.4
6 F 48 10 2 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.3
7 F 61 10 2.25 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.25 0.3
8 F 64 10 1.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 0 0.2
9 F 44 10 4 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 1
10 F 52 10 3.2 0.5 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.5
11 F 61 10 3 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.4 1
12 F 60 10 2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.5
13 F 48 10 3.4 0.6 0.2 0.6 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.4
14 F 63 10 2.3 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.3
AVG c) 52.07 10 2.43 0.41 0.26 0.45 0.39 0.21 0.40 0.5
SDd) 10.96 0 0.73 0.10 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.09 0.39
a)Botulinum toxin, b)Hyaluronic acid filler, c)AVG, average; d)SD, standard deviation.
Kyoung-Jin Kang, Choong-Yee Chai
124
www.jcosmetmed.org
were noted as overcorrection. Apart from this, there are no
significant complications which have been reported by other
researchers (Table 5).
Morphological analysis
Shape of chin
The chin was projected anteriorly and lengthened inferiorly
and the labiomental crease moved superiorly due to increased
skeletal support by the subperiosteal augmentation. Lengthen-
ing of the lower one-third of the face by chin augmentation sig-
nificantly contributed to the change in the facial contour from
round to elliptical (Fig. 3). Mental dimpling was immediately
improved, although the filler was injected into the subperiosteal
layer, and it was corrected with the combination of the botuli-
num toxin treatment (Fig. 4A, B).
Shape of the mouth and lips
Despite the eversion of the upper lip and shortening of the
philtrum, the mouth looked small and less protruded (Fig. 3A,
B). The lower lip was inverted and volumized, projected anteri-
orly, and rotated counterclockwise (Fig. 4C, D). These were due
to the increased skeletal support by the chin augmentation.
The preoperative sagging appearance of the upper lip was
improved by the shortened distance between the subnasale
and the vermillion border of the upper lip. It was because of the
need, to close mouth due to the decreased gap distance, was
reduced (Fig. 3, 4).
Change of perioral animation
Before the procedure, the corner of the mouth was superolat-
eral and perioral wrinkles, chin wrinkles, labiomandibular folds,
Table 2. Change of proportion in lower face
Number
Of cases
(n)
Sex Age
Change of facial proportion
Length of Before (mm) Ratio of Before (%)c) Length of After (mm) Ratio of After (%)d)
Ia) IIa) IIIa) Totalb) I/Total II/Total III/Total Ia) IIa) IIIa) Totalb) I/Total II/Total III/Total
1 F 60 20 14.5 21.5 56 35.7 25.9 38.4 20 13.5 22.5 56 35.7 24.1 40.2
2 F 33 16.5 12 18.9 47.4 34.8 25.3 39.9 16 11.4 20 47.4 33.8 24.1 42.2
3 M 40 20 15.7 17 52.7 38 29.8 32.3 20 15.7 17 52.7 38 29.8 32.3
4 F 34 17.7 12.5 15.5 45.7 38.7 27.4 33.9 17.7 12.5 17.5 47.7 37.1 26.2 36.7
5 F 61 16.7 10 22.8 49.5 33.7 20.2 46.1 16.7 10 23.5 50.2 33.3 19.9 46.8
6 F 48 22.3 18 20 60.3 37 29.9 33.2 22.3 18 22 62.3 35.8 28.9 35.3
7 F 61 21.9 13 17.5 52.4 41.8 24.8 33.4 20.5 13 19.7 53.2 38.5 24.4 37
8 F 64 19 13.4 17.3 49.7 38.2 27 34.8 19 13.4 20 52.4 36.3 25.6 38.2
9 F 44 20 13 18 51 39.2 25.5 35.3 20 15.3 22 57.3 34.9 26.7 38.4
10 F 52 15.7 12.2 14.3 42.2 37.2 28.9 33.9 15.7 12.2 14.3 42.2 37.2 28.9 33.9
11 F 61 14 9 14 37 37.8 24.3 37.8 14 10 17 41 34.1 24.4 41.5
12 F 60 20.5 14.3 19 53.8 38.1 26.6 35.3 20.5 13 22 55.5 36.9 23.4 39.6
13 F 48 21 13 16 50 42 26 32 21 13 20 54 38.9 24.1 37
14 F 63 21.5 13.5 21.5 56.5 38.1 23.9 38.1 21.5 13 24 58.5 36.8 22.2 41
AVG e) 52.07 19.1 13.2 18.1 50.3 37.9 26.1 36 18.9 13.1 20.1 52.2 36.2 25.2 38.6
SDf) 10.96 2.54 2.21 2.7 5.99 2.28 2.54 3.78 2.49 2.13 2.82 6.01 1.74 2.73 3.72
a)I, length of upper 1/3; II, length of meddle 1/3, and III, length of lower 1/3; b)Total=whole length of lower face =I+II+III. c)Ratio of before (%):
Ratio of before length of I or II or III to total before length of lower face=I or II or III /Total X100. d)Ratio of after (%): Ratio of after length of I or
II or III to total after length of lower face=I or II or III /Total×100. e)AVG, average; f)SD, standard deviation.
Table 3. Statistical analysis of proportional change in lower 1/3 face
from the raw data of Table 2
Zone Change of facial proportion (mm) pa)
Before After
I 19.06±2.54 18.92±2.49 0.213
II 13.15±2.21 13.14±2.13 0.976
III 18.09±2.70 20.11±2.82 0.000
Total 50.30±5.99 52.17±6.01 0.003
Zone Zone's ratios of each zone to whole lower face (%)b)
pa)
Before After
I 37.9±2.28 36.2±1.74 0.001
II 26.1±2.54 25.2±2.73 0.026
III 36.0±3.78 38.6±22.2 0.000
Total 100 100
a)Paired t-test. b)When the whole length of lower face is considered
as 100%, the average length’s ratios of each zone.
Subperiosteal chin augmentation with hyaluronic acid filler in patients with a small chin
www.jcosmetmed.org
125
and the mental dimple were obvious when the corner of the
mouth was elevated strongly (Fig. 5A, C) due to the combined
contraction of the mentalis and risorius muscles. However, after
the chin augmentation, the wrinkles and the folds were notice-
ably softened and shortened. The mental dimple was also cor-
rected (Fig. 5B, D). This effect was caused the hypo-contraction
of mentalis muscle, which was induced by subperiosteal filler
augmentation.
Discussion
The injectable filler has been very popularly used to improve
the lower facial contour with the correction of a small chin [4].
Although filler augmentation has been considered as an easy
procedure, complications such as nodules, bumps, lumps, filler
migration, asymmetry, and chin ptosis have frequently oc-
curred when the filler is injected into the subdermal, intramus-
cular, and submuscular layers, as shown in Fig. 6. Moreover,
the incidence of complication is known to depend on the type,
placement, and amount of the injected filler and the skill of the
physician who performs the procedure. Because of this, the au-
thors obtained some notable results by injecting the filler into
the subperiosteal layer, which has not been commonly used for
chin augmentation.
After subperiosteal augmentation, the small chin and contour
of the lower face were notably improved. Bunching and pouting
with a mental dimple, perioral wrinkles, and labio-mandibular
folds immediately disappeared (Fig. 3). The gap between the
lips was considerably decreased in all cases and almost all of
the patients had great satisfaction with the easy closing of the
mouth, and some patients had significant improvement of the
early morning dry mouth (Table 4). Moreover, common compli-
cations were almost prevented or showed a very low incidence
(Table 5).
Table 4. Change of modified Legan's angle, open gap distance between lips, and change of dry mouth
Number
Of cases (n) Sex Age Modified Legan's angle(°) Open gap distance (mm) Change of dry mouth as a
subjective symptom (%)a)
Before After RR (%)b) Before After RR (%)b) Before After RR (%)b)
1 F 60 8 3 62.5 7.5 2.5 66.7 100 20 80
2 F 33 13 9.5 26.9 6 2 66.7 0 0 -
3 M 40 11 8 27.3 2 0.5 75 0 0 -
4 F 34 24.5 19.5 20.4 2 0.5 75 0 0 -
5 F 61 6 2 66.7 2 0 100 100 50 50
6 F 48 11.3 7.8 31 7 3 57.1 100 20 80
7 F 61 21.7 16.2 25.3 3 0 100 0 0 -
8 F 64 6 3.5 41.7 5 2 60 100 0 100
9 F 44 24 19 20.8 7 4 42.9 0 0 -
10 F 52 15.5 8.5 45.2 7 2.5 64.3 100 50 50
11 F 61 13 8 38.5 8 4.5 43.8 100 100 -
12 F 60 14.5 11 24.1 9 5 44.4 0 0 -
13 F 48 21 16 23.8 5 2 60 100 20 80
14 F 63 6.5 2.3 64.6 7 2 71.4 100 0 100
AVG c) 52.1 14 9.59 37.1 5.54 2.18 66.2 77.14
SDd) 11 6.561 6.04 16.71 2.41 1.59 17.87 20.59
a)The change of subject symptom of dry mouth after the procedure if considering that dry mouth symptom felt before the procedure is 100%. b)RR:
Reduction ratio (%)=(After×100/Before)–100. c)AVG, average; d)SD, standard deviation.
Table 5. Possible complications and incidence from filler augmentation
Complications Incidence (%)a) Complications Incidence (%)a)
Swelling/Pressure Pain 14/14 (100) Lumps/ Bumps 0/14 (0)
Bleeding/Bruising 2/14 (14) Infection /Inflammation 0/14 (0)
Asymmetry due to uneven surface 2/14 (14) Nodules 0 /14 (0)
Overcorrection 2/14 (14 ) Vascular occlusion 0/14 (0)
Migration 0/14 (0) Chin drooping 0/14 (0)
a)Incidence (%), Number of patients who have complications/Total number of patients×100.
Kyoung-Jin Kang, Choong-Yee Chai
126
www.jcosmetmed.org
Moreover, these morphological effects were strongly sup-
ported by the statistical analysis, which is as follows: the length
of the lower one-third from the lower border of the face was
increased and its proportional ratio to the lower face was also
increased. It supported the change of contour in the lower face
from round with a sagging appearance to elliptical with a lifted
appearance (Table 3). The modified Legan’s angle was signifi-
cantly decreased in all cases. It strongly supported the anterior
projection of the small chin, and eventually, the mouth looked
smaller and less protruding. The decreased gap between the
lips was due to increased skeletal support by the chin augmen-
tation (Table 4). The augmentation resolved the mental dimple
with bunching and pouting and prevented perioral animation
(Fig. 4, 5). From these results, it was confirmed that there was a
close correlation between the statistical measurements and the
morphological analysis.
The morphological change in the length of the middle one-
third was not obvious and there was also no statistically signifi-
cant change in the length of the middle one-third. This was due
to the inversion and anterior projection of the lower lip and also
due to the influence of the decrease in the length of the upper
lip caused by the decrease in the gap between the lips (Fig. 3, 4).
The reason for the decrease of the upper one-third was be-
cause the gap between the lips was markedly reduced by the
change of the lower and middle one-third, and the need to con-
tract the orbicular oris muscle in order to close the mouth was
reduced.
The authors would like to describe the mechanism as below.
First, we need to understand the basic concepts of the size and
shape of the facial bones and the skeletal support of the soft
tissues surrounding them. In other words, small and flat bones
provide poor skeletal support to the surrounding soft tissues,
Fig. 3. Immediate changes of lips after
chin augmentation in status of mentalis
muscle on animation. Filler was injected
into a 48-year-old woman who had a
small chin (13th case from Table 1 and 2).
Air jet® indirect infusion system (Union
medical Co. Ltd, Republic of Korea) was
also applied only to the fronto-temporo-
parietal areas for non-invasive face
lifting.
I
II
III
21 17.5
I
II
III
A B
C D
Subperiosteal chin augmentation with hyaluronic acid filler in patients with a small chin
www.jcosmetmed.org
127
Fig. 4. Change of chin appearance 3
weeks after chin augmentation. (A)
Before procedure, (B) 3 weeks after
procedure. Filler and botulinum toxin
were injected into a 60-year-old woman
who had a small chin (12th case from
Table 1 and 2).
A B
C D
resulting in the sagging of the soft tissues, while large and pro-
truded bones provide strong skeletal support to the surrounding
soft tissues, preventing sagging [11]. Therefore, the soft tissues
on the small and flat bony mentum receive poor skeletal sup-
port, and in terms of the mentalis muscle in relaxation, the soft
tissues of the chin, including the lower lip, sagged and eventu-
ally resulted in incomplete mouth closure. In order to avoid this,
patients usually will contract the mentalis muscle to close their
mouths and it is at this time that the mouth appears to protrude
as bunching and pouting with the appearance of the mentalis
dimple. In this kind of situation, if the filler is injected into the
subdermal, intramuscular, submuscular, and supraperiosteal
layers, it induces poor skeletal support and not only increases
chin ptosis but also causes the injected filler to migrate from the
injection site, gathering into bumps, lumps, or nodules beneath
the skin because of bunching and pouting due to continuous
mentalis contraction [12].
In this study, there were no complications such as chin ptosis
and vascular occlusion as shown in Table 5. We used six entry
sites and attempted to correct the asymmetric chin by inject-
ing different amounts of the filler into each site. However, in the
area of mental dimpling where the amount of soft tissue signifi-
cantly decreased before the procedure, an uneven surface oc-
curred in two cases and it was the main cause of the asymmetry.
This was corrected by injecting a small amount of filler into the
subdermal and submuscular layers.
The purpose of this study was not to increase the volume of
the soft tissues of the chin but to correct the bony deformity of
the small and flat mentum through subperiosteal injection and
eventually increase the skeletal support provided to the soft tis-
sues. Marked improvements were noted as mentioned above
and additionally, the incidence of complications was decreased.
Kyoung-Jin Kang, Choong-Yee Chai
128
www.jcosmetmed.org
Conclusion
Subperiosteal filler injection is a noteworthy alternative for
the correction of the small chin without chin ptosis. Moreover,
its additional benefits, such as the improvement of dry mouth,
lips contour, and perioral wrinkles are attributed to the in-
creased skeletal support for the soft tissues of the lower lip and
chin by the subperiosteal placement of the filler.
Acknowledgments
Our sincere gratitude goes to Park Min-Su, Ph.D. who contrib-
uted to the quality improvement of this paper with appropriate
and excellent statistical analysis.
Conflicts of interest
The authors have nothing to disclose.
A B
C D
Fig. 5. Immediate change of perioral ani-
mation after filler injection. Filler was
injected into a 52-year-old woman who
had a small chin (9th case from Table 1
and 2). (A) and (C) Before procedure, (B)
and (D) Immediately after procedure.
Fig. 6. A complication case characterized
by tiny multiple nodules, mental dimples,
asymmetry, and chin ptosis occurred
to the patient, who has been injected
man-made filler into intradermal,
subcutaneous, and submuscular layers.
(A) Frontal view, (B) Lateral view.
A B
Subperiosteal chin augmentation with hyaluronic acid filler in patients with a small chin
www.jcosmetmed.org
129
References
1. Kang KJ. SAFI (Sequential autologous fat injection). Seoul:
Koonja Publishi ng Inc.; 2017. p. 234-36.
2. Bertossi D, Galzignato PF, Albanese M, Botti C, Botti G, No-
cini PF. Chin microgenia: a clinical comparative study. Aes-
thetic Plast Surg 2015;39:651-8.
3. Bass LS. Injectable filler techniques for facial rejuvenat ion,
volumi zation, and augmentation. Facial Plast Surg C lin North
Am 2015;2 3:479 -88 .
4. Rho NK, Chang YY, Chao YY, Furuyama N, Huang PY, Ker-
scher M, et al. Consensus recommendations for optimal aug-
mentation of the Asian face w ith hyaluronic acid and calcium
hydrox ylapatite fillers. Plast Reconst r Surg 2015;136:940-56.
5. Gar fein ES, Zide BM. Chin ptosis: classification, a natomy, and
correction. Cran iomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr 2008;1:1-14.
6. Mendelson B, Wong CH. Changes in the facial skeleton with
aging: implications and clinical applications in facial rejuve-
nation. Aesthet ic Plast Surg 2012;36:753-60.
7. Rohrich RJ, Pessa JE. Discussion. Aging of t he facial skeleton:
aesthetic implications and rejuvenation strategies. Plast Re-
constr Surg 2011;127:384-5.
8. Shaw RB Jr, Katzel EB, Kolt z PF, Yaremchuk MJ, Girotto JA,
Kahn DM, et al. Aging of the facial skeleton: aesthetic im-
plications and rejuvenation strategies. Plast Reconstr Surg
2011;127:374-83.
9. Car ruthers J, Fagien S, Matarasso SL; Botox Consensus Group.
Consensus recommendations on the use of botulinum toxin
type a in facial aesthetics. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004;114(6
Suppl):1S-22S.
10. Arroyo HH, Olivetti IP, Lima LF, Jurado JR. Clinical evalua-
tion for chin augmentation: literature review and algorithm
proposal. Braz J Otorhinolar yngol 2016;82:596-601.
11. Kang KJ. SAFI (Sequential autologous fat injection). Seoul:
Koonja Publishi ng Inc.; 2017. p. 71-6.
12. Belmontesi M, Grover R, Verpaele A. Transdermal injection of
Restylane SubQ for aesthetic contouring of the cheeks, chin,
and mandible. Aesthet Surg J 200 6;26(1S):S28-34.
