Reduction Rhinoplasty Re-Endorsed: When Conservative and Measured
SUMMARY: Reduction rhinoplasty has been widely criticised and dismissed due to the current preference for structural rhinoplasty. The criticism is related to airway compromise and secondary structural deformities, both early and late, due to overzealous resection. This two-year study attempted to pr...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Elsevier
2021-12-01
|
Series: | JPRAS Open |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352587821000644 |
id |
doaj-68c4cb67f31f4948ac3401d849cddbc0 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-68c4cb67f31f4948ac3401d849cddbc02021-08-20T04:35:27ZengElsevierJPRAS Open2352-58782021-12-01305360Reduction Rhinoplasty Re-Endorsed: When Conservative and MeasuredPeter Sylaidis0Corresponding Author: Dr. Peter Sylaidis, Specialist Plastic Surgeon, Adelaide Plastic Surgery, Level 4, 18 North Terrace, Adelaide, 5000. South Australia. Australia. +61 8 82131800; Adelaide Plastic Surgery, Level 4, 18 North Tce, Adelaide, 5000, South Australia, AustraliaSUMMARY: Reduction rhinoplasty has been widely criticised and dismissed due to the current preference for structural rhinoplasty. The criticism is related to airway compromise and secondary structural deformities, both early and late, due to overzealous resection. This two-year study attempted to prospectively assess the risk of airway and structural problems following reduction rhinoplasty in 30 consecutive patients. The findings showed no statistically significant difference either in the NOSE score (subjective sense of breathing) or in nasal valving (objective observations), at the 3-month follow-up. Subsequent 12-month telephone reviews revealed no change in the patients’ functional or aesthetic outcomes. There was a 3% structural complication rate (requiring secondary surgery) and a 20% rate for further refining reduction surgery.The findings confirmed the author's impression that conservative, measured reduction rhinoplasty, performed with due consideration to preserving the nasal supportive framework, is a technique well worth endorsing with confidence to reduce the disproportionately large nose. Contemporary surgeons need not feel obliged to only use the more complex later-developed structural rhinoplasty techniques.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352587821000644Reduction rhinoplastycosmetic rhinoplastyrhinoplasty complications |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Peter Sylaidis |
spellingShingle |
Peter Sylaidis Reduction Rhinoplasty Re-Endorsed: When Conservative and Measured JPRAS Open Reduction rhinoplasty cosmetic rhinoplasty rhinoplasty complications |
author_facet |
Peter Sylaidis |
author_sort |
Peter Sylaidis |
title |
Reduction Rhinoplasty Re-Endorsed: When Conservative and Measured |
title_short |
Reduction Rhinoplasty Re-Endorsed: When Conservative and Measured |
title_full |
Reduction Rhinoplasty Re-Endorsed: When Conservative and Measured |
title_fullStr |
Reduction Rhinoplasty Re-Endorsed: When Conservative and Measured |
title_full_unstemmed |
Reduction Rhinoplasty Re-Endorsed: When Conservative and Measured |
title_sort |
reduction rhinoplasty re-endorsed: when conservative and measured |
publisher |
Elsevier |
series |
JPRAS Open |
issn |
2352-5878 |
publishDate |
2021-12-01 |
description |
SUMMARY: Reduction rhinoplasty has been widely criticised and dismissed due to the current preference for structural rhinoplasty. The criticism is related to airway compromise and secondary structural deformities, both early and late, due to overzealous resection. This two-year study attempted to prospectively assess the risk of airway and structural problems following reduction rhinoplasty in 30 consecutive patients. The findings showed no statistically significant difference either in the NOSE score (subjective sense of breathing) or in nasal valving (objective observations), at the 3-month follow-up. Subsequent 12-month telephone reviews revealed no change in the patients’ functional or aesthetic outcomes. There was a 3% structural complication rate (requiring secondary surgery) and a 20% rate for further refining reduction surgery.The findings confirmed the author's impression that conservative, measured reduction rhinoplasty, performed with due consideration to preserving the nasal supportive framework, is a technique well worth endorsing with confidence to reduce the disproportionately large nose. Contemporary surgeons need not feel obliged to only use the more complex later-developed structural rhinoplasty techniques. |
topic |
Reduction rhinoplasty cosmetic rhinoplasty rhinoplasty complications |
url |
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352587821000644 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT petersylaidis reductionrhinoplastyreendorsedwhenconservativeandmeasured |
_version_ |
1721201670437732352 |