Download PDF
Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2017; 21(01): 97-101
DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1586489
Systematic Review
Thieme-Revinter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Rhinoplasty Complications and Reoperations: Systematic Review

Paulo Fernando Tormin Borges Crosara
1   Ophthalmology and Otorhinolaryngology, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
,
Flávio Barbosa Nunes
1   Ophthalmology and Otorhinolaryngology, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
,
Danilo Santana Rodrigues
1   Ophthalmology and Otorhinolaryngology, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
,
Ana Rosa Pimentel Figueiredo
1   Ophthalmology and Otorhinolaryngology, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
,
Helena Maria Gonçalves Becker
1   Ophthalmology and Otorhinolaryngology, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
,
Celso Goncalves Becker
2   Department of Ear Nose and Throat, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil
,
Roberto Eustáquio Santos Guimarães
1   Ophthalmology and Otorhinolaryngology, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

16 February 2016

18 June 2016

Publication Date:
22 September 2016 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction This article is related to complications of rhinoplasty and its main causes of reoperations.

Objectives The objective of this study is to perform a systematic review of literature on complications in rhinoplasty.

Data Synthesis The authors conducted a survey of articles related to key terms in the literature by using three important databases within 11 years, between January 2002 and January 2013. We found 1,271 abstracts and selected 49 articles to this review.

Conclusion The main results showed that the number of primary open rhinoplasty was 7902 (89%) and 765 closed (11%) and the percentage of reoperations in primary open complete rhinoplasties was 2.73% and closed complete was 1.56%. The statistical analysis revealed a value of p = 0.071. The standardization of terms can improve the quality of scientific publications about rhinoplasty. There is no difference between primary open or closed rhinoplasty techniques in relation to reoperations.

Keywords

postoperative complications - surgical revision - rhinoplasty
 

  • References

  • 1 Thomson C, Mendelsohn M. Reducing the incidence of revision rhinoplasty. J Otolaryngol 2007; 36 (2) 130-134 10.2310/7070.2007.0012
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Izu SC, Kosugi EM, Brandão KV , et al. Normal values for the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) questionnaire. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2012; 78: 76-79 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22936141
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Akobeng AK. Principles of evidence based medicine. Arch Dis Child 2005; 90 (8) 837-840 10.1136/adc.2005.071761
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Acarturk S, Arslan E, Demirkan F, Unal S. An algorithm for deciding alternative grafting materials used in secondary rhinoplasty. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2006; 59 (4) 409-416 , discussion 417–418 10.1016/j.bjps.2005.05.023
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Akcam T, Friedman O, Cook TA. The effect on snoring of structural nasal valve dilatation with a butterfly graft. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004; 130 (11) 1313-1318 10.1001/archotol.130.11.1313
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Arslan E, Majka C, Beden V. Combined use of triple cartilage grafts in secondary rhinoplasty. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2007; 60 (2) 171-179 10.1016/j.bjps.2006.04.014
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Arslan E, Unal S, Demirkan F, Gurbuz O, Beden V. Augmentation rhinoplasty with a combination of triple cartilage grafts for secondary rhinoplasty in a middle-aged population. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2005; 29 (4) 240-245 10.1007/s00266-004-0079-4
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Avşar Y. Nasal hump reduction with powered micro saw osteotomy. Aesthet Surg J 2009; 29 (1) 6-11 10.1016/j.asj.2008.10.009
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Boccieri A. Mini spreader grafts: a new technique associated with reshaping of the nasal tip. Plast Reconstr Surg 2005; 116 (5) 1525-1534 10.1097/01.prs.0000182787.99210.10
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Boccieri A, Marianetti TM. Perichondrium graft: harvesting and indications in nasal surgery. J Craniofac Surg 2010; 21 (1) 40-44 10.1097/SCS.0b013e3181c362df
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Bracaglia R, Fortunato R, Gentileschi S. Double lateral osteotomy in aesthetic rhinoplasty. Br J Plast Surg 2004; 57 (2) 156-159 10.1016/j.bjps.2003.11.008
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Bracaglia R, Fortunato R, Gentileschi S. Secondary rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2005; 29 (4) 230-239 10.1007/s00266-005-0034-z
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Camirand A, Doucet J, Harris J. Nose surgery: how to prevent a middle vault collapse—a review of 50 patients 3 to 21 years after surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004; 114 (2) 527-534 10.1097/01.PRS.0000128425.01547.45
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Chang CWD, Simons RL. Hockey-stick vertical dome division technique for overprojected and broad nasal tips. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2008; 10 (2) 88-92 10.1001/archfaci.10.2.88
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Cingi C, Eskiizmir G, Cakli H. Comparative analysis of primary and secondary rhinoplasties according to surgeon's perspective, patient satisfaction, and quality of life. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2012; 121 (5) 322-327
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Clark JM, Cook TA. The ‘butterfly’ graft in functional secondary rhinoplasty. Laryngoscope 2002; 112 (11) 1917-1925 10.1097/00005537-200211000-00002
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Constantian MB. Differing characteristics in 100 consecutive secondary rhinoplasty patients following closed versus open surgical approaches. Plast Reconstr Surg 2002; 109 (6) 2097-2111 10.1097/00006534-200205000-00048
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Daniel RK. Rhinoplasty: septal saddle nose deformity and composite reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007; 119 (3) 1029-1043 10.1097/01.prs.0000252503.30804.5e
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Daniel RK. Middle Eastern rhinoplasty in the United States: Part I. Primary rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009; 124 (5) 1630-1639 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181babc95
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Davis AM, Simons RL, Rhee JS. Evaluation of the Goldman tip procedure in modern-day rhinoplasty. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2004; 6 (5) 301-307 10.1001/archfaci.6.5.301
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 de la Peña-Salcedo JA, Soto-Miranda MA, Lopez-Salguero JF. Treatment protocol for “Mestizo nose” with open rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2011; 35 (6) 972-988 10.1007/s00266-011-9717-9
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Dosanjh AS, Hsu C, Gruber RP. The hemitransdomal suture for narrowing the nasal tip. Ann Plast Surg 2010; 64 (6) 708-712 10.1097/SAP.0b013e3181b02701
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Elahi MM, Jackson IT, Moreira-Gonzalez A, Yamini D. Nasal augmentation with Surgicel-wrapped diced cartilage: a review of 67 consecutive cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 111 (3) 1309-1318 , discussion 1319–1321 10.1097/01.PRS.0000047442.41691.C8
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Foda HMT. External rhinoplasty for the Arabian nose: a columellar scar analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2004; 28 (5) 312-316 10.1007/s00266-003-3126-7
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Foda HMT. Rhinoplasty for the multiply revised nose. Am J Otolaryngol 2005; 26 (1) 28-34 10.1016/j.amjoto.2004.06.014
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Funk E, Chauhan N, Adamson PA. Refining vertical lobule division in open septorhinoplasty. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2009; 11 (2) 120-125 10.1001/archfacial.2008.527
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Gandomi B, Arzaghi MH, Rafatbakhsh M. The effectiveness of modified vertical dome division technique in reducing nasal tip projection in rhinoplasty. Iran J Med Sci 2011; 36 (3) 196-200 http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=3556763&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract . Accessed April 8 2013
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Gruber RP, Kryger G, Chang D. The intercartilaginous graft for actual and potential alar retraction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008; 121 (5) 288e-296e 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31816c3b9a
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Gryskiewicz JM. Waste not, want not: the use of AlloDerm in secondary rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2005; 116 (7) 1999-2004 10.1097/01.prs.0000191180.77028.7a
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Gubisch W, Eichhorn-Sens J. Overresection of the lower lateral cartilages: a common conceptual mistake with functional and aesthetic consequences. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2009; 33 (1) 6-13 10.1007/s00266-008-9267-y
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Gubisch W, Eichhorn-Sens J. The sliding technique: a method to treat the overprojected nasal tip. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2008; 32 (5) 772-778 10.1007/s00266-008-9211-1
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Gürlek A, Ersoz-Ozturk A, Celik M, Firat C, Aslan S, Aydogan H. Correction of the crooked nose using custom-made high-density porous polyethylene extended spreader grafts. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2006; 30 (2) 141-149 10.1007/s00266-005-0152-7
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Guyuron B, Varghai A. Lengthening the nose with a tongue-and-groove technique. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 111 (4) 1533-1539 , discussion 1540–1541 10.1097/01.PRS.0000049637.42449.80
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Keskin M, Tosun Z, Savaci N. The importance of maintaining the structural integrity of the lateral crus in tip rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2009; 33 (6) 803-808 10.1007/s00266-009-9358-4
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Kim JS, Han KH, Choi TH , et al. Correction of the nasal tip and columella in Koreans by a complete septal extension graft using an extensive harvesting technique. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2007; 60 (2) 163-170 10.1016/j.bjps.2006.03.055
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Kridel RWH, Castellano RD. A simplified approach to alar base reduction: a review of 124 patients over 20 years. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2005; 7 (2) 81-93 10.1001/archfaci.7.2.81
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Margulis A, Harel M. Management of severe tip ptosis in closed rhinoplasty: the horizontal columellar strut. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2007; 60 (4) 400-406 10.1016/j.bjps.2006.10.013
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Mayaleh HA. The onlay folded flap (OFF): a new technique for nasal tip surgery. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2011; 35 (1) 73-79 10.1007/s00266-010-9562-2
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Pensler JM. The role of the upper lateral cartilages in aesthetic rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J 2009; 29 (4) 290-294 10.1016/j.asj.2009.04.006
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Pensler JM. The septal strut for nasal projection following closed rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J 2006; 26 (3) 275-279
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Ponsky D, Eshraghi Y, Guyuron B. The frequency of surgical maneuvers during open rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010; 126 (1) 240-244 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181dc54da
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Rohrich RJ, Hoxworth RE, Kurkjian TJ. The role of the columellar strut in rhinoplasty: indications and rationale. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012; 129 (1) 118e-125e 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182362b7a
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Rohrich RJ, Raniere Jr J, Ha RY. The alar contour graft: correction and prevention of alar rim deformities in rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2002; 109 (7) 2495-2505 , discussion 2506–2508
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Saltman BE, Pearlman SJ. Incidence of alarplasty in primary and revision rhinoplasty in a private practice setting. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2009; 11 (2) 114-118 10.1001/archfacial.2008.521
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Seneldir S, Korkut AY, Coskun BU, Teker AM, Gedikli O, Kahya V. Unilateral osteotomies for external bony deviation. J Craniofac Surg 2010; 21 (6) 1890-1893 10.1097/SCS.0b013e3181f4af44
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Skouras A, Asimakopoulou F-A, Skouras G, Divritsioti M, Dimitriadi K. Use of the Goldman technique to correct both the overprojected and the broad nasal tip. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2012; 36 (1) 54-61 10.1007/s00266-011-9780-2
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 47 Tellioğlu AT, Özakpinar HR, Cakir B, Tekdemir I. Importance of the levator labii alaeque nasi muscle in dorsal septal deviations. J Craniofac Surg 2011; 22 (2) 446-449 10.1097/SCS.0b013e3182077ae5
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 48 Timperley D, Stow N, Srubiski A, Harvey R, Marcells G. Functional outcomes of structured nasal tip refinement. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2010; 12 (5) 298-304 10.1001/archfacial.2010.57
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 49 Oliveira PWB, Pezato R, Gregório LC. Deviated nose correction by using the spreader graft in the convex side. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2006; 72: 760-763
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 50 Yu K, Kim A, Pearlman SJ. Functional and aesthetic concerns of patients seeking revision rhinoplasty. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2010; 12 (5) 291-297 10.1001/archfacial.2010.62
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar