Airflow Considerations and the Effect of Webster's Triangle in Reduction Rhinoplasty.

Background: Reduction rhinoplasties, regardless of the methods used (structural or preservation), can cause a reduction in the internal nasal volume, which may lead to breathing problems. In 1977, Webster proposed preserving a little triangle in the beginning of the lower lateral osteotomy line to prevent breathing problem. However, its importance is still controversial.

Objectives: and methods: This prospective randomized controlled study (level of evidence 1) included 46 patients without nasal breathing problem. High-to-low (Webster's triangle preservation) osteotomy (control group, n = 23) and low-to-low osteotomy (study group, n = 23) were performed. All operations were performed according to the proposed volumetric rhinoplasty steps (examination/measurement, prevention and treatment). Nasal obstruction symptom evaluation (NOSE) test, visual analog scale, acoustic rhinometry, rhinomanometry, peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF), and three-dimensional measurements were performed in all patients. Breathing tests were repeated before and 6 months after surgery with and without xylometazoline administration.

Results: No statistically significant difference in NOSE and visual analog scale scores was found between the two groups. Acoustic rhinometry, PNIF, and rhinomanometry findings showed no statistically significant breathing difference between the two groups.

Conclusions: In reduction rhinoplasties, a decrease in the internal volume may be expected as directly proportional with the reduction amount. The decrease in the internal volume may create nasal breathing problems. To prevent it, nasal airflow should be adjusted according to new anatomy. In this study, we discussed "volumetric rhinoplasty" steps to prevent breathing problems in reduction rhinoplasty. Following these steps, not preserving Webster's triangle (low-to-low osteotomy) has no effect on the nasal airway.

Level Of Evidence Ii: 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 Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .