Current clinical practices of the Rhinoplasty Society members.

Ann Plast Surg

From the *Department of Plastic Surgery, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; and †Academic Health Center School of Dentistry, Cleft Palate and Craniofacial Clinics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.

Published: November 2013

Introduction: As rhinoplasty remains among the most challenging and controversial operations in plastic surgery, we sought to elucidate present-day practice characteristics. Members of The Rhinoplasty Society were polled in preparation for the national meeting held in Boston, Mass, on May 2011. The goal was to provide information regarding surgical approaches used as well as technique and practice patterns used.

Methods: Two electronic surveys were distributed to members of The Rhinoplasty Society in preparation for the annual meeting. All 76 members received the surveys as well as instructions for completion. The initial survey included 10 questions discussing the preferred approach for rhinoplasty and practice details. The second survey dealt with specific techniques used during rhinoplasty. Data were collected and reviewed.

Results: The primary survey yielded a 61.8% response rate, whereas the secondary survey 48.7%. Of all surgeons, 72% reported doing the open approach for primary rhinoplasty more than 50% of the time, whereas the remaining 28% use the closed approach. For secondary rhinoplasty, 76% reported using the open approach in more than half of cases for which they were not the primary surgeons. In contrast, 53% used the closed approach in more than half the cases of secondary surgery if they were the initial surgeons. Revision rates for primary and secondary rhinoplasties were 9.1% and 7.8%, respectively. The difference was not statistically significant. On average, members performed 101 nasal surgeries per year. Previous patient recommendation was the most common reason for referral. Of the members, 54% reported using spreader grafts in more than half of the cases of aesthetic rhinoplasty and 75.7% when pertaining to functional rhinoplasty. Finally, 37.8% of responding members reported using tip grafts more than half the time when performing aesthetic rhinoplasty.

Conclusions: Of the responding members of The Rhinoplasty Society, the open approach is the preferred choice for both primary and other surgeons' revision rhinoplasties. Spreader grafts are commonplace in both functional and aesthetic rhinoplasties.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0b013e3182503ca1DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

rhinoplasty society
16
members rhinoplasty
12
open approach
12
half cases
12
rhinoplasty
11
members
8
reported open
8
closed approach
8
approach half
8
spreader grafts
8

Similar Publications

The Use of Costal Cartilage in Rhinoplasty.

Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am

November 2024

Private Practice, Bergamo, Italy; Rhinoplasty Society of Europe, Italian Society of Plastic Surgery, Ospedale Papa Giovanni XXIII, Bergamo, Italy.

Article Synopsis
  • * Rib cartilage is a suitable option when there's not enough septal cartilage available, especially in primary or revisional surgeries.
  • * Carving rib cartilage beforehand allows for adjustments and helps prevent warping, making it a reliable and high-quality source for cartilage in nasal surgeries.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF
Article Synopsis
  • * Common techniques include the use of autospreader flaps and spreader grafts.
  • * Surgeons can often utilize various types of cartilage (septal, auricular, and costal) for grafting, favoring the use of the patient's own tissues.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Considering the importance of the nose in the beauty of the face, accurate and systematic three-dimensional nasal analysis of the nose before the procedure is essential. The radix, and so the nasofrontal and nasofacial angles, play an essential role in forming an aesthetically pleasing nose because they influence the length and projection of the nose. We aimed to measure information about the pre-operative radix position in our region.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF
Article Synopsis
  • Hemifacial microsomia (HFM) is a common congenital facial malformation characterized by underdevelopment of one side of the face and ear, often requiring multiple surgeries for correction.
  • This case study details the surgical history of a 35-year-old woman with severe HFM, who underwent several reconstructive procedures, including auricle reconstruction and a face lift, leading to satisfactory aesthetic results.
  • The study concludes that addressing HFM through reconstructive surgery is crucial for enhancing quality of life and social integration for affected individuals.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!