Study on the influence of buried thread nasal augmentation on dorsal soft tissue of nose and revision rhinoplasty / 中国修复重建外科杂志

OBJECTIVE@#To investigate the influence of buried thread nasal augmentation on dorsal soft tissue of nose and revision rhinoplasty.@*METHODS@#A clinical data of 29 patients requesting revision rhinoplasty after buried thread nasal augmentation, who were admitted between July 2017 and July 2019 and met the selection criteria, was retrospectively analyzed. All patients were female with an average age of 26.8 years (range, 18-43 years). The patiens were admitted to the hospital at 3-48 months after buried thread nasal augmentation (median, 15 months). Among them, there were 18 cases of insufficient nasal tip projection, 22 cases of insufficient nasal root projection, 7 cases of threads ectasia, 5 cases of threads exposure, 3 cases of infection, and 10 cases with two or more conditions. There were 9 cases of combined short nose deformity, 1 case of spherical hypertrophy of the nasal tip, 3 cases of deviation of the nasal columella, 3 cases of excessive width of the nasal base, and 1 case of nasal hump. Three infected patients only underwent threads removal and debridement. The rest patients underwent revision rhinoplasty, and the dorsum of the nose was made with polytetrafluoroethylene expansion; the tip of the nose was reshaped by taking autologous rib cartilage and alar cartilage in 16 cases, and by taking autologous septal cartilage and alar cartilage in another 10 cases. The threads and surrounding tissue specimens removed during operation were subjected to histologic observation. Nasal length and nasal tip projection were measured after revision rhinoplasty and the ratio was calculated to evaluate the nasal morphology; patient satisfaction was evaluated using the Likert 5-grade scale.@*RESULTS@#Patients were followed up 12-48 months (mean, 18 months). Inflammation was controlled in 3 patients with infections caused by buried thread nasal augmentation. The remaining 26 patients had satisfactory results immediately after revision rhinoplasty. Before revision rhinoplasty and at 7 days and 6 months after revision rhinoplasty, the nasal length was (4.11±0.34), (4.36±0.25), and (4.33±0.22) cm, respectively; the nasal tip projection was (2.34±0.25), (2.81±0.18), and (2.76±0.15) cm, respectively; and the nasal tip projection/nasal length ratio was 0.57±0.08, 0.65±0.05, and 0.64±0.04, respectively. There were significant differences in the nasal length and the nasal tip projection between time points ( P<0.05). There was a significant difference in the nasal tip projection/nasal length ratio between pre- and post-operation ( P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between 7 days and 6 months after operation ( P>0.05). The Likert score for satisfaction ranged from 1.5 to 5.0 (mean, 4.05). During follow-up period of 26 patients, no nasal prosthesis was exposed, and the shape of the nose was stable, and the nasal skin of 5 patients with exposed threads could be seen with different degrees of scarring; there was no infection, cartilage resorption, and no cartilage deformation, displacement, or exposure. Histological observation showed that absorbable threads were not only absorbed after implantation, but also with the prolongation of time, the inflammatory changes in the surrounding tissues caused by decomposition and absorption of the threads showed a gradual aggravation of the first, the heaviest inflammatory reaction in 6 to 12 months, and then gradually reduce the trend.@*CONCLUSION@#After implantation of the absorbable thread into the subcutaneous tissue of the nasal dorsum, the nature of the thread is different from the body's own tissue, which will affect the soft tissue compliance of the nasal dorsum. The degradation and absorption of the thread will stimulate the infiltration of inflammatory cells and the proliferation of fibroblasts in the surrounding tissue and then form scar tissue, which will affect the design and effect of revision rhinoplasty.

Analysis of revision rhinoplasty; what is the problem and the management?

Background: Revision rhinoplasty is reported to occur in 8% to 15%. Reoperation should be performed to correct deformities that were not diagnosed or addressed in previous surgeries, such as those from poor planning, performance and poor surgical healing. The aim of the study was to evaluate the problem of each case seeking revision rhinoplasty and different modalities for management to reach satisfactory results.Methods: This is a prospective study which was done in plastic surgery department, Menoufia University Hospitals over the period from December 2017 to December 2019. The study included 31 patients underwent previous rhinoplasty.Results: Patients were selected from the outpatient clinic, 31 patients who had varieties of nasal deformities. Mean age of the patients was 31.7 years. Female represent the majority of patients by 80.60% and males were 19.40% with significant difference in satisfaction (p=0.05). Patient satisfaction after surgery and it was excellent for 14 cases (45.20%), good for 9 cases (29 %) and it was fair in 8 cases (25.8%). Rhinoplasty outcome evaluation (ROE) score was correlated with patient satisfaction grades as mean of ROE score in excellent group was 67.5; in good group was 58.3; while in fair group was 38.8 with significant p value (0.001).Conclusions: Excellent patient satisfaction is related good planning, close follow up time, and less complication. Cartilage grafts especially rib cartilage is considered a lifeboat for revision rhinoplasty. We can link grades of patient satisfaction to ROE score.

Autologous costal cartilage for nasal tip surgery: report of 86 cases / 中华医学美学美容杂志

Objective To present our experience and techniques with the use of autologous costal cartilage grafts in Asian rhinoplasty,and to report the surgical results and complications in 86 consecutive rhinoplasty cases.Methods All operations were performed by the first author (Liu AT) with open approach,costal cartilages and perichondrium were used to reconstruct the nasal tip projection according to the tripod theory in rhinoplasty,after removing the previous injection material,L-shaped implant or hypertrophic scar tissue in the tip.Medical charts and operative records were reviewed retrospectively to summary the complications.Nasal dorsum augmentation was done by costal cartilage or I-shaped allograft,sometimes with anterior sheath of rectus abdominis.Patients' subjective satisfaction of the postoperative nasal appearance was self-evaluated with grading (1 worse,2 no change,3 improved,and 4 much improved).Results From September 2015 to March 2017,86 patients underwent rhinoplasty at our hospital.The postoperative follow-up duration was 6 to 20 months.Overall,functional and aesthetic outcome was satisfactory in most patients,and the mean score by the patients' self-evaluation was 3.3 ± 0.6.Graft exposure,mobility,or significant resorption,pneumothorax or significant donor-site pain were not observed.Conclusions Even with minimal complications and morbidities,autologous costal cartilage grafts in Asian rhinoplasty is a versatile and reliable graft material for nasal tip surgery in severe short or saddle nose,contracted nose due to previous L-shaped augmentation and revision rhinoplasty in which the septal cartilage has already been harvested.

Revision rhinoplasty: physician-patient aesthetic and functional evaluation / Revision rhinoplasty: physician-patient aesthetic and functional evaluation

Abstract Introduction: Approximately 5-15% of patients submitted to rhinoplasty operations undergo revision surgery. Those patients have varied functional and aesthetic complaints that should receive a detailed assessment that includes all the expectations the patient had before the previous procedure. Objective: To draw the profile of the main aesthetic-functional complaints reported by patients to be submitted to revision rhinoplasty and to correlate them with the internal and external objective nasal evaluation performed by the surgeon. Methods: A prospective study was conducted with 43 patients to be submitted to revision rhinoplasty and their respective surgeons, by applying a questionnaire about the patients' epidemiological questions and subjective aesthetic-functional complaints as well as the respective functional deformities observed by the surgeons. Subsequently, these data were correlated with the purpose of observing the frequency of congruent reports between physicians and patients. Results: The presence of drooping tip and residual bridge hump were the patients' main complaints, confirmed by the surgeons. The correlation between subjective obstructive symptoms and the intranasal evaluation performed by surgeons was shown to be present in 87.5% of the cases. Among the patients with respiratory symptoms, the main deformity identified was residual septal deviation in 56.25% of the cases. Conclusion: The drooping tip followed by residual hump were the main complaints reported by the patients and confirmed by the objective examination by the physicians. The presence of nasal obstructive complaints in 37.2% of the patients shows that greater attention needs to be paid to functional deformities during the first surgical procedure. The differences observed between patients' complaints and surgeons' evaluations confirm the need for detailed assessment and clarification to the patients regarding their expectations and actual surgical possibilities.

Resumo: Introdução: As rinoplastias possuem índice de revisão em torno de 5% a 15% dos pacientes operados. Tais pacientes possuem queixas funcionais e estéticas variadas e a avaliação detalhada é de extrema importância, tendo em vista todas as expectativas em torno de um procedimento já anteriormente realizado. Objetivo: Traçar o perfil das principais queixas estético-funcionais referidas pelo paciente a ser submetido à rinoplastia revisional e correlacioná-las a avaliação nasal objetiva interna e externa realizada pelo cirurgião. Método: Foi realizado um estudo prospectivo com 43 pacientes a serem submetidos à rinoplastia revisional e com seus respectivos cirurgiões, através da aplicação de questionário acerca de questões epidemiológicas e queixas estético-funcionais subjetivas dos pacientes e as respectivas deformidades funcionais observadas pelos cirurgiões. Após, esses dados foram correlacionados com a finalidade de observar a frequência de relatos concomitantes entre os médicos e pacientes. Resultados: A presença de ponta caída e giba óssea residual foram as principais queixas dos pacientes confirmadas pelos cirurgiões. Já a correlação entre sintomas subjetivos obstrutivos e a avaliação intranasal realizada pelos cirurgiões demonstrou estar presente em 87,5% dos casos. Dentre os pacientes com sintomas respiratórios, a principal deformidade encontrada foi o desvio septal residual em 56,25% dos casos. Conclusão: A ponta caída seguida de giba óssea residual foram as principais queixas relatadas pelos pacientes e confirmadas ao exame objetivo pelos médicos. A presença de 37,2% dos pacientes com queixas obstrutivas nasais demonstra que maior atenção deve ser dada a deformidades funcionais já durante o primeiro procedimento cirúrgico. As diferenças observadas entre as queixas dos pacientes e avaliações dos cirurgiões comprovam a necessidade da avaliação pormenorizada e esclarecimento ao paciente com relação as suas expectativas e reais possibilidades cirúrgicas.

Evaluation and Treatment of Nasal Obstruction Developed after Rhinoplasty / 대한이비인후과학회지

Nasal airway obstruction is one of the most frequent causes of revision rhinoplasty despite the golden rule that nasal function should not be sacrificed because of cosmetic reason. Nasal function is jeopardized due to diverse reasons including inaccurate diagnosis or inadequate surgical technique. Detailed and thorough evaluation of the nose with review of previous operative technique is necessary to find out exact causes of obstruction. Septum, middle vault, tip, nostril, and nasal mucosa are common anatomic areas of obstruction after rhinoplasty. They are often weakened, damaged, or even destroyed losing their original shape, strength, or position. Changes in these anatomic structures are strongly related to static and/or dynamic obstruction. In this article, authors reviewed the common locations, anatomic causes, and treatment strategies of nasal obstruction after rhinoplasty.

Causas de rinoplastía secundaria: análisis de 277 casos / Secondary rhinoplasty causes: analysis of 277 cases

Introducción: La rinoplastía secundaria cada día es más frecuente debido a la creciente popularidad de la cirugía estética y también por las mayores expectativas del paciente y del cirujano. La rinoplastía secundaria ha llegado a ser un campo en evolución con desafíos únicos. Para enfrentarlo adecuadamente el cirujano debe analizar y comprender las necesidades específicas del paciente y las causas anatómicas que generaron el problema y cómo corregirlo. Objetivo: Identificar los problemas anatómicos más frecuentemente encontrados en 277 rinoplastías secundarias y sistematizarlos para una mejor evaluación preoperatoria y planificación quirúrgica. Material y método: Análisis retrospectivo de 1.160 rinoplastías operadas por el otorrinolaringólogo Dr. Luis Villarroel entre el 1 de enero de 2006 y el 31 de marzo de 2015, de las cuales 277 son rinoplastías secundarias (24%). En ellas se encontraron 1.197 problemas o deformidades (4,3 promedio), que se dividieron en tercio superior, medio, inferior y endonasales, con una subdivisión de deformidades individuales dentro de cada grupo. También se comparan los resultados encontrados según si la cirugía primaria fue de otro cirujano (rinoplastías secundarias) o del mismo autor (rinoplastías de revisión). Resultados: El 85% de los pacientes presentó problemas en el tercio inferior. Los problemas más frecuentes fueron desviación del tabique nasal (problema endonasal) (56%), punta hiporotada (47%), desviación del dorso óseo (34%) y desviación del dorso cartilaginoso (30%). Las rinoplastías de revisión, comparadas con las secundarias, presentan un porcentaje mayor de problemas de insuficiente resección del dorso óseo y menos dorsos cartilaginosos estrechos. Conclusión: Existen diferentes razones por las que un paciente busca una rinoplastía secundaria. Es importante conocer las causas más frecuentes con el fin de identificar los errores cometidos en el primer caso y evitar dichas prácticas. Es preferible una cirugía primaria conservadora porque evita problemas difíciles de resolver. Esta clasificación nos ayuda a sistematizar el análisis preoperatorio, a saber, dónde estamos teniendo problemas y así corregirlos y obtener mejores resultados quirúrgicos.

Introduction: Secondary rhinoplasty is becoming increasingly common due to the growing popularity of cosmetic surgery and also by higher expectations of the patient and the surgeon. Secondary rhinoplasty has become an evolving field with unique challenges. To repair the surgeon must properly analyze and understand the specific concerns of the patient and the anatomical causes of why you need a new operation. Aim: To identify anatomical problems most frequently found in 277 secondary and systematize rhinoplasty for better preoperative evaluation and surgical planning. Material and method: Retrospective analysis of 1160 rhinoplasty operated by otolaryngologist Dr. Luis Villarroel between January 1006 and March 31, 2015, of which 277 are secondary rhinoplasty (24%). In this study we found 1197 problems or deformities (average 4.3), They were classified into upper, middle, bottom third ,and endonasal, with an individual deformities subdivision within each group. The results are compared if the primary surgery was another surgeon (secondary rhinoplasty of others) or by the same author (revision rhinoplasty). Results: 85% of patients had problems in the lower third. The most common individual problems identificated were deviated septum (56%), drop tip (47%), bone dorsum deviation (34%), and cartilaginous dorsum desviation (30%). The author presents a higher percentage of insufficient bone resection and less cartilaginous dorsum narrow. Conclusion: There are different reasons why a patient seeks a secondary rhinoplasty. It is important to know the most frequent causes in order to identify the mistakes made in the first instance and avoid them. It's preferable one conservative primary surgery because it avoids difficult problems. This classification helps us to systematize the preoperative analysis and better results.