PDF icon PDF herunterladen
Open Access
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Arch Plast Surg 2022; 49(05): 569-579
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1756315
Cosmetic: Review Article

Outcomes of Closed versus Open Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review

Rohun Gupta 
1   Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, Michigan
,
Jithin John
1   Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, Michigan
,
Noopur Ranganathan
1   Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, Michigan
,
Rima Stepanian
1   Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, Michigan
,
Monik Gupta
2   The University of Toledo Health Science Campus, Toledo, Ohio
,
Justin Hart
3   Department of Plastic Surgery, Beaumont Health Systems, Royal Oak, Michigan
,
Farideddin Nossoni
3   Department of Plastic Surgery, Beaumont Health Systems, Royal Oak, Michigan
,
Kenneth Shaheen
3   Department of Plastic Surgery, Beaumont Health Systems, Royal Oak, Michigan
,
Adam Folbe
4   Department of Otolaryngology, Beaumont Health Systems, Royal Oak, Michigan
,
Kongkrit Chaiyasate 
3   Department of Plastic Surgery, Beaumont Health Systems, Royal Oak, Michigan
› Institutsangaben
Funding None.
› Weitere Informationen
  Lizenzen und Reprints
Preview

Abstract

Open and closed rhinoplasty are two main approaches to perform nasal modifications. According to current literature, there is no current consensus among plastic surgeons and otolaryngologists on which technique is preferred in terms of aesthetic result, complications, and patient satisfaction. This study uses published research to determine whether open or closed rhinoplasty leads to superior patient outcomes. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for systematic reviews were followed and a literature search was conducted in four databases based on our search strategy. Articles were then imported into COVIDENCE where they underwent primary screening and full-text review. Twenty articles were selected in this study after 243 articles were screened. There were 4 case series, 12 retrospective cohort studies, 1 prospective cohort study, 1 case–control, and 2 outcomes research. There were three cosmetic studies, eight functional studies, and nine studies that included both cosmetic and functional components. Sixteen studies utilized both open and closed rhinoplasty and four utilized open rhinoplasty. Both techniques demonstrated high patient and provider satisfaction and no advantage was found between techniques. Based on available studies, we cannot conclude if there is a preference between open or closed rhinoplasty in terms of which technique leads to better patient outcomes. Several studies determined that open rhinoplasty and closed rhinoplasty leads to comparative patient satisfaction. To make outcome reporting more reliable and uniform among studies, authors should look to utilize the Nasal Obstruction and Septoplasty Effectiveness scale and the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation.

Keywords

rhinoplasty - cosmetic techniques - reconstructive surgical procedures - nasal surgical procedures

Disclosure

The authors have no financial interests in relation to the content of the article.


Ethical Approval

Institutional review board approval as well as patient consent were not required for this study.


Authors' Contributions

Conceptualization: R.G., J.J., N.R., R.S., M.G., J.H., F.N., K.S., A.F., K.C. Funding acquisition: None required. Methodology: R.G., J.J. Writing original draft: R.G., J.J., N.R., R.S., M.G., J.H., F.N., K.S., A.F., K.C. Writing - review & editing: R.G., J.J., K.S., A.F., K.C.




Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 01. Januar 2022

Angenommen: 18. April 2022

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
23. September 2022

© 2022. The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA