OBJECTIVE: In cases of dissatisfaction after rhinoplasty for esthetic or functional reasons, or both, revision rhinoplasty may be advocated to improve the patients' nasal performance. In contrast to studies on primary rhinoplasty, no objective outcome evaluation parameter has been validated in revision rhinoplasty, nor has there been a study specifically looking at long-term satisfaction after revision rhinoplasty. We aim at studying patient satisfaction after a long-term follow-up of revision rhinoplasty performed at an academic referral center. METHODS: At a mean period of 2.5 years after revision rhinoplasty, 90 patients who underwent a revision rhinoplasty at the Academic Medical Center in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, were sent a questionnaire on general satisfaction together with the validated rhinoplasty outcome evaluation (ROE) questionnaire. RESULTS: Of the 46 patients who responded to the questionnaire, 88% experienced a significant improvement in nasal performance by revision rhinoplasty, and 79% would choose to undergo the revision procedure again. Subgroup analysis of the ROE scores demonstrated that good satisfaction was mainly obtained in the young adult and middle-aged groups, without major differences between males and females. Satisfaction was unrelated to the open or closed technique used for revision, or to the graft material used. Interestingly, an inverse correlation was found between satisfaction and the number of previous rhinoplasties. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study demonstrates that revision rhinoplasty in an academic practice provides most patients with long-standing satisfaction.
OBJECTIVE: In cases of dissatisfaction after rhinoplasty for esthetic or functional reasons, or both, revision rhinoplasty may be advocated to improve the patients' nasal performance. In contrast to studies on primary rhinoplasty, no objective outcome evaluation parameter has been validated in revision rhinoplasty, nor has there been a study specifically looking at long-term satisfaction after revision rhinoplasty. We aim at studying patient satisfaction after a long-term follow-up of revision rhinoplasty performed at an academic referral center. METHODS: At a mean period of 2.5 years after revision rhinoplasty, 90 patients who underwent a revision rhinoplasty at the Academic Medical Center in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, were sent a questionnaire on general satisfaction together with the validated rhinoplasty outcome evaluation (ROE) questionnaire. RESULTS: Of the 46 patients who responded to the questionnaire, 88% experienced a significant improvement in nasal performance by revision rhinoplasty, and 79% would choose to undergo the revision procedure again. Subgroup analysis of the ROE scores demonstrated that good satisfaction was mainly obtained in the young adult and middle-aged groups, without major differences between males and females. Satisfaction was unrelated to the open or closed technique used for revision, or to the graft material used. Interestingly, an inverse correlation was found between satisfaction and the number of previous rhinoplasties. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study demonstrates that revision rhinoplasty in an academic practice provides most patients with long-standing satisfaction.
Authors: Olcay Cem Bulut; Frank Wallner; Dare Oladokun; Claire Kayser; Michaela Plath; Eric Schulz; Peter Karl Plinkert; Ingo Baumann Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-12-04 Impact factor: 4.147