Literature DB >> 23511747

Current clinical practices of the Rhinoplasty Society members.

Michael Lee1, Jacob G Unger, Joe Gryskiewicz, Rod J Rohrich.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: As rhinoplasty remains among the most challenging and controversial operations in plastic surgery, we sought to elucidate present-day practice characteristics. Members of The Rhinoplasty Society were polled in preparation for the national meeting held in Boston, Mass, on May 2011. The goal was to provide information regarding surgical approaches used as well as technique and practice patterns used.
METHODS: Two electronic surveys were distributed to members of The Rhinoplasty Society in preparation for the annual meeting. All 76 members received the surveys as well as instructions for completion. The initial survey included 10 questions discussing the preferred approach for rhinoplasty and practice details. The second survey dealt with specific techniques used during rhinoplasty. Data were collected and reviewed.
RESULTS: The primary survey yielded a 61.8% response rate, whereas the secondary survey 48.7%. Of all surgeons, 72% reported doing the open approach for primary rhinoplasty more than 50% of the time, whereas the remaining 28% use the closed approach. For secondary rhinoplasty, 76% reported using the open approach in more than half of cases for which they were not the primary surgeons. In contrast, 53% used the closed approach in more than half the cases of secondary surgery if they were the initial surgeons. Revision rates for primary and secondary rhinoplasties were 9.1% and 7.8%, respectively. The difference was not statistically significant. On average, members performed 101 nasal surgeries per year. Previous patient recommendation was the most common reason for referral. Of the members, 54% reported using spreader grafts in more than half of the cases of aesthetic rhinoplasty and 75.7% when pertaining to functional rhinoplasty. Finally, 37.8% of responding members reported using tip grafts more than half the time when performing aesthetic rhinoplasty.
CONCLUSIONS: Of the responding members of The Rhinoplasty Society, the open approach is the preferred choice for both primary and other surgeons' revision rhinoplasties. Spreader grafts are commonplace in both functional and aesthetic rhinoplasties.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23511747     DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e3182503ca1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Plast Surg        ISSN: 0148-7043            Impact factor:   1.539


  3 in total

Review 1.  Revision Rhinoplasty: With Introduction of a Novel Preoperative Assessment Classification System.

Authors:  Austin Jiang; Edward S Chamata; Fred J Bressler
Journal:  Semin Plast Surg       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 2.314

2.  Varied Definitions of Nasolabial Angle: Searching for Consensus Among Rhinoplasty Surgeons and an Algorithm for Selecting the Ideal Method.

Authors:  Ryan Harris; Purushottam Nagarkar; Bardia Amirlak
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2016-06-20

3.  Assessment of Functional Rhinoplasty with Spreader Grafting Using Acoustic Rhinomanometry and Validated Outcome Measurements.

Authors:  Marek A Paul; Parisa Kamali; Austin D Chen; Ahmed M S Ibrahim; Winona Wu; Babette E Becherer; Caroline Medin; Samuel J Lin
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2018-03-19
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.