Daily Cosmetic Research Analysis
Methodological innovation and clinical optimization emerged across cosmetic domains. A new end-to-end workflow identified and optimized plant extracts for cosmetic actives, while a large retrospective comparison suggests subfascial breast augmentation may reduce key complications versus subpectoral placement. Additionally, national database analysis indicates same-day discharge after orthognathic surgery is not associated with higher 30-day readmission.
Summary
Methodological innovation and clinical optimization emerged across cosmetic domains. A new end-to-end workflow identified and optimized plant extracts for cosmetic actives, while a large retrospective comparison suggests subfascial breast augmentation may reduce key complications versus subpectoral placement. Additionally, national database analysis indicates same-day discharge after orthognathic surgery is not associated with higher 30-day readmission.
Research Themes
- Cosmetic ingredient discovery and optimization
- Technique selection and complication reduction in aesthetic breast surgery
- Ambulatory pathways and safety in facial/orthognathic surgery
Selected Articles
1. A Workflow for Selecting, Profiling, and Optimizing Plant Extracts for Cosmetic Applications.
The authors present an end-to-end, reproducible workflow to prioritize and optimize plant extracts for cosmetic actives. Screening 1,614 species led to 18 candidates profiled with HPLC-DAD/ELSD and in vitro assays; a dual bioactivity-novelty score identified top species, and controlled rotational geoponics improved antioxidant performance of Borago officinalis at low temperature.
Impact: This work provides a generalizable methodological framework linking discovery, profiling, and agronomic optimization—bridging ingredient science with scalable production for cosmetics.
Clinical Implications: While preclinical, the workflow accelerates translation of safer, effective natural actives into dermatologic and cosmetic products, potentially improving efficacy and sustainability of formulations.
Key Findings
- Screened 1,614 plant species; 18 shortlisted for HPLC-DAD/ELSD profiling and in vitro antioxidant/enzymatic assays.
- A dual scoring system (bioactivity + novelty) prioritized four promising species for cosmetic development.
- Controlled rotational geoponics of Borago officinalis enhanced antioxidant properties under low-temperature conditions.
Methodological Strengths
- End-to-end, reproducible workflow from regulatory screening to phytochemical profiling and functional assays.
- Integration of agronomic optimization (rotational geoponics) to enhance bioactivity of a candidate species.
Limitations
- Predominantly in vitro assays; lack of in vivo or clinical validation.
- Generalizability beyond the French flora and industrial partner conditions remains to be tested.
Future Directions: Validate prioritized extracts in skin-relevant in vitro models (e.g., reconstructed epidermis), conduct safety/toxicity profiling, and transition to early clinical testing with standardized cultivation SOPs.
In response to the growing demand for innovative natural ingredients in cosmetics, this study proposes a structured approach to identifying bioactive plant species available in France. From 1614 species screened for regulatory acceptability and innovation potential, 18 were shortlisted for phytochemical profiling (high-performance liquid chromatography [HPLC]-diode array detector [DAD]/evaporative light scattering detector [ELSD]) and in vitro antioxidant and enzymatic assays. A dual scoring system combining bioactivity and novelty metrics highlighted four promising species for cosmetic development. To explore how cultivation methods can optimize ingredient performance, Borago officinalis L., a fifth species with moderate initial scores, was selected for a case study based on its agronomic feasibility, identified with an industrial partner. Cultivated indoors under controlled conditions using a rotational geoponics system, borage showed improved antioxidant properties under low-temperature conditions. These findings provide a replicable workflow for sourcing plant-based natural active ingredients and illustrate how tailored cultivation can unlock the potential of well-known but underexploited species.
2. Subpectoral vs Subfascial Cosmetic Breast Augmentation: Are We Ready to Settle?
In a single-surgeon retrospective series (n=193), subfascial augmentation had significantly lower rates of capsular contracture (1.1% vs 5.2%), lateral malposition (8.8% vs 23.4%), and double-bubble deformity (0% vs 3.7%) than subpectoral placement, with similar acute complication rates. Larger implant volumes correlated with lateral malposition across planes.
Impact: This is the first direct comparison of subfascial versus subpectoral augmentation via inframammary incisions, providing clinically actionable evidence on complication profiles that may shift plane selection.
Clinical Implications: For patients prioritizing function and aesthetic stability (e.g., athletes), subfascial placement may reduce capsular contracture, lateral malposition, and double-bubble risk. Implant sizing remains critical to minimize malposition.
Key Findings
- Subfascial vs subpectoral: lower capsular contracture (1.1% vs 5.2%, p=0.04).
- Subfascial vs subpectoral: lower lateral malposition (8.8% vs 23.4%, p<0.001) and no double-bubble deformity (0% vs 3.7%, p=0.02).
- Acute complication rates were low and similar (0.5% vs 1.6%, p=0.61); larger implants were associated with lateral malposition.
Methodological Strengths
- Direct head-to-head comparison of subfascial and subpectoral planes within a single surgeon’s practice reduces technique variability.
- Balanced cohorts across a 12-year period with clearly defined complication endpoints and statistical testing.
Limitations
- Retrospective design with potential selection confounding; no propensity matching or multivariable adjustment reported.
- Generalizability limited to inframammary approach and single-surgeon technique.
Future Directions: Prospective, multicenter comparative studies with standardized implant selection and patient-reported outcomes to validate complication differences and functional benefits.
BACKGROUND: Utilization of the sub-fascial plane in breast augmentation has many purported advantages. The vast majority of studies examining post-operative outcomes in sub-fascial breast augmentation have drawn comparisons to the sub-glandular plane. In order to further develop our understanding of the potential advantages of the sub-fascial augmentation technique a direct comparison to the ubiquitous sub-pectoral (dual plane) technique is required. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study is to provide the first direct comparison of post-operative outcomes observed in sub-fascial and sub-pectoral breast augmentations utilizing an inframammary incision. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed identifying all patients who underwent either sub-fascial or sub-pectoral cosmetic breast augmentations by the senior author between 2011 and 2023. Acute and late complications were identified with particular attention to the double bubble deformity, lateral implant malposition and capsular contracture. RESULTS: 193 patients (386 breasts) were identified for the study. 96/193 patients (192 breasts, 49.7%) underwent sub-pectoral augmentation, while 97/193 patients (194 breasts, 50.3%) underwent sub-fascial augmentation. A total acute complication rate of 1.0% was observed. The acute complication rate between the two groups was statistically insignificant (1/194 (0.5%) sub-fascial vs. 3/192 (1.6%) sub-pectoral, p = 0.61). The sub-fascial cohort demonstrated a statistically significant lower rate of capsular contracture (2/194 (1.1%) sub-fascial vs. 10/192 (5.2%) sub-pectoral, p=0.04), lateral implant malposition (17/194 (8.8%) sub-fascial vs. 45/192 (23.4%) sub-pectoral, p=<0.001) and double bubble deformity (0/194 (0%) sub-fascial vs. 7/192 (3.7%) sub-pectoral, p=0.02) compared to the sub-pectoral cohort. The average volume of implants used in patients demonstrating lateral malposition was statistically larger than the volume of implants used in patients not demonstrating lateral malposition. This was true for all implants (358cc vs. 329.9cc, p=0.008), as well as both the sub-pectoral (355.2 cc vs. 329.8 cc, p=0.03) and the sub-fascial (366 cc vs. 329.9 cc, p=0.004) cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the sub-fascial plane in cosmetic breast augmentation offers several advantages over the traditional sub-pectoral (dual-plane) approach. These include reduced rates of lateral malposition, double bubble deformity development and capsular contracture. These findings suggest that sub-fascial breast augmentation may be a superior option for many patients, particularly those who are physically active and/or concerned about long-term pectoralis muscle function.
3. Is Same Day Discharge Associated With Readmission After Orthognathic Surgery?
Using NSQIP data (n=2,056), same-day discharge after orthognathic surgery was not associated with higher 30-day readmission (0.40% vs 1.10%, RR 0.4, P=.3). Adoption of same-day pathways increased from 10.7% (2011) to 23.1% (2023).
Impact: Provides large-scale, contemporary safety data supporting ambulatory pathways in orthognathic surgery, with implications for cost, access, and patient experience.
Clinical Implications: In appropriately selected patients, same-day discharge can be considered without increasing 30-day readmissions, enabling value-based care and increased operating room throughput.
Key Findings
- Same-day discharge vs inpatient admission: 30-day readmission 0.40% vs 1.10% (RR 0.4, 95% CI 0.09–1.72; P=.3).
- Same-day discharge utilization increased from 10.7% (2011) to 23.1% (2023) (P=.03).
- No demographic, medical, or perioperative covariates were associated with readmission in bivariate analysis.
Methodological Strengths
- Large national surgical quality database (NSQIP) spanning 2011–2023.
- Clear inclusion/exclusion criteria and predefined primary outcome (30-day readmission).
Limitations
- Retrospective design with primarily bivariate analyses; potential residual confounding.
- Readmission is a crude safety endpoint; other outcomes (e.g., ER visits, pain control) not assessed.
Future Directions: Prospective implementation studies with risk-adjusted outcomes and patient-reported measures to refine selection criteria and perioperative pathways.
BACKGROUND: Same day discharge pathways have the potential to reduce health care expenditures and improve access to care for patients undergoing orthognathic surgery. However, the effect of same day discharge on safety and postoperative outcomes is poorly understood. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to measure the association between discharge pathway and 30-day hospital readmission, as well as evaluate trends in same day discharge over time in patients undergoing orthognathic surgery. STUDY DESIGN, SETTING SAMPLE: This was a retrospective cohort study using the 2011 to 2023 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program databases. Patients undergoing orthognathic surgery were included. Patients with missing data or undergoing concurrent temporomandibular joint or facial cosmetic procedures were excluded. PREDICTOR VARIABLE: The predictor was discharge pathway, categorized as either same day discharge from the hospital or inpatient admission. MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE: The primary outcome was hospital readmission within 30 days of surgery. COVARIATES: Covariates were categorized into demographic (age, sex), medical (hypertension, diabetes), and perioperative (type of surgery, operative time). ANALYSES: Descriptive and bivariate statistics were performed to evaluate the association between discharge pathway and readmission. Linear regression was utilized to analyze trends in discharge pathway over time. RESULTS: The cohort was composed of 2,056 subjects with a mean age of 28.8 ± 10.8 years, and 1,035 were male (50.3%). Of these, 468 (22.8%) were discharged the same day and 1,588 (77.2%) were admitted. Readmission rates were 0.40% (n = 2) for same day discharge and 1.10% (n = 17) for inpatient admission (relative risk 0.4, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.72, P = .3). In bivariate analysis, no study covariates including discharge pathway were associated with readmission. The mean time between discharge and readmission for the same day discharge and inpatient admission groups were 7.5 ± 6.4 days and 12.2 ± 9.0 days, respectively (P = .4). The frequency of same day discharge increased during the study period from 10.7% in 2011 to 23.1% in 2023 (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Same day discharge was not associated with an increased risk of 30-day readmission in appropriately selected patients.