Exploring the Resurgence of the Preservation Rhinoplasty : A Systematic Literature Review
© 2023. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery..
INTRODUCTION: The underlying principles of preservation rhinoplasty (PR) center around maintaining the soft tissue envelope, dorsum, and alar cartilage through surgical manipulations and tip suture techniques. In particular, the let-down (LD) and push-down (PD) techniques have been described, although reports of indications and outcomes in the literature are sparse.
METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed using search terms "preservation" OR "let down" OR "push down" AND "rhinoplasty" on PubMed, Cochrane, SCOPUS, and EMBASE databases. Patient demographic information, operative details, and surgical outcomes were recorded. Sub-cohorts for patients who underwent LD and PD techniques were analyzed utilizing Fischer's exact test for categorical variables and Student's t test for continuous variables.
RESULTS: Overall, there were 5967 PR patients in 30 studies in the final analysis, with 307 patients in the PD cohort and 529 patients in the LD cohort. The Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation Questionnaire showed a significant increase of patient satisfaction after PR compared to before PR (62.13 vs 91.14; p < 0.001). There was a significantly lower rate of residual dorsal hump or recurrence of 1.3% (n = 4) in the PD when compared to 4.6% (n = 23) in LD cohorts (p = 0.02). The revision rate of PD (0%, n = 0) was also significantly lower than that of LD (5.0%, n = 25) (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Based on these published articles, it seems that preservation rhinoplasty is safe and efficacious procedure with improved dorsal aesthetic lines, reduced dorsal contour irregularities, and claimed excellent patient satisfaction. In particular, the PD technique has fewer reported complications and revisions than LD approach, although PD is often indicated in patients with smaller dorsal humps.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: 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 the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.
Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
---|
Erscheinungsjahr: |
2023 |
---|---|
Erschienen: |
2023 |
Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:47 |
---|---|
Enthalten in: |
Aesthetic plastic surgery - 47(2023), 4 vom: 03. Aug., Seite 1488-1493 |
Sprache: |
Englisch |
---|
Beteiligte Personen: |
Wells, Michael W [VerfasserIn] |
---|
Links: |
---|
Themen: |
Journal Article |
---|
Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 23.10.2023 Date Revised 24.10.2023 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
---|
doi: |
10.1007/s00266-023-03345-8 |
---|
funding: |
|
---|---|
Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM35634309X |
---|
LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | NLM35634309X | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20231226070245.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 231226s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s00266-023-03345-8 |2 doi | |
028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1187.xml |
035 | |a (DE-627)NLM35634309X | ||
035 | |a (NLM)37130993 | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
100 | 1 | |a Wells, Michael W |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Exploring the Resurgence of the Preservation Rhinoplasty |b A Systematic Literature Review |
264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
500 | |a Date Completed 23.10.2023 | ||
500 | |a Date Revised 24.10.2023 | ||
500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
520 | |a © 2023. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery. | ||
520 | |a INTRODUCTION: The underlying principles of preservation rhinoplasty (PR) center around maintaining the soft tissue envelope, dorsum, and alar cartilage through surgical manipulations and tip suture techniques. In particular, the let-down (LD) and push-down (PD) techniques have been described, although reports of indications and outcomes in the literature are sparse | ||
520 | |a METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed using search terms "preservation" OR "let down" OR "push down" AND "rhinoplasty" on PubMed, Cochrane, SCOPUS, and EMBASE databases. Patient demographic information, operative details, and surgical outcomes were recorded. Sub-cohorts for patients who underwent LD and PD techniques were analyzed utilizing Fischer's exact test for categorical variables and Student's t test for continuous variables | ||
520 | |a RESULTS: Overall, there were 5967 PR patients in 30 studies in the final analysis, with 307 patients in the PD cohort and 529 patients in the LD cohort. The Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation Questionnaire showed a significant increase of patient satisfaction after PR compared to before PR (62.13 vs 91.14; p < 0.001). There was a significantly lower rate of residual dorsal hump or recurrence of 1.3% (n = 4) in the PD when compared to 4.6% (n = 23) in LD cohorts (p = 0.02). The revision rate of PD (0%, n = 0) was also significantly lower than that of LD (5.0%, n = 25) (p < 0.001) | ||
520 | |a CONCLUSION: Based on these published articles, it seems that preservation rhinoplasty is safe and efficacious procedure with improved dorsal aesthetic lines, reduced dorsal contour irregularities, and claimed excellent patient satisfaction. In particular, the PD technique has fewer reported complications and revisions than LD approach, although PD is often indicated in patients with smaller dorsal humps | ||
520 | |a LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: 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 the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 | ||
650 | 4 | |a Systematic Review | |
650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
650 | 4 | |a Review | |
650 | 4 | |a Preservation | |
650 | 4 | |a Review | |
650 | 4 | |a Rhinoplasty | |
700 | 1 | |a DeLeonibus, Anthony |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Barzallo, Devin |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Chang, Irene A |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Swanson, Marco |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Guyuron, Bahman |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Aesthetic plastic surgery |d 1976 |g 47(2023), 4 vom: 03. Aug., Seite 1488-1493 |w (DE-627)NLM012961906 |x 1432-5241 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:47 |g year:2023 |g number:4 |g day:03 |g month:08 |g pages:1488-1493 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00266-023-03345-8 |3 Volltext |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 47 |j 2023 |e 4 |b 03 |c 08 |h 1488-1493 |