Umut Tuncel1, Ilhami Oguzhan Aydogdu2, Alper Kurt3. 1. Department of Plastic, Reconstructive, and Aesthetic Surgery, Liv Hospital, Samsun, Turkey. 2. Department of Plastic, Reconstructive, and Aesthetic Surgery, Medicana İnternational Hospital, Samsun, Turkey. 3. Department of Plastic, Reconstructive, and Aesthetic Surgery, Gazi State Hospital, Samsun, Turkey.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hump recurrence is a commonly encountered problem following dorsal preservation (DP) rhinoplasty when surgeons are learning the procedure. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper was to compare the different methods for the prevention and treatment of dorsal problems following DP surgery. METHODS: One hundred and fifty primary rhinoplasty patients were included in our study. Their noses were classified in terms of both hump shape (V- or S-shaped) and height. All patients had a DP rhinoplasty by either a push-down (PD) or a let-down (LD) technique. The PD method was used for humps <4 mm and the LD for humps >4 mm. Follow-up evaluations were made with physical examination and photographs at 1 week, 3 months, and 12 months. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 12.68 [1.78] months. Seventy-eight humps were V-shaped and 72 were S-shaped. PD was used for 67 cases, LD for 83 cases. Eight patients (5.3%, 8/150) had a visible dorsal hump problem after DP surgery. Based on their preoperative hump shape, 3 cases were V-shaped and 5 were S-shaped. All recurrent cases had a preoperative hump deformity >4 mm. The revision procedures were as follows: 4 patients had a PD procedure, 3 had a LD procedure, and 1 patient was treated by classic open resection rhinoplasty. CONCLUSIONS: There is a correlation between preoperative hump height and eventual hump recurrence. The complication rate can be decreased with additional technical maneuvers and proper patient selection.
BACKGROUND: Hump recurrence is a commonly encountered problem following dorsal preservation (DP) rhinoplasty when surgeons are learning the procedure. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper was to compare the different methods for the prevention and treatment of dorsal problems following DP surgery. METHODS: One hundred and fifty primary rhinoplasty patients were included in our study. Their noses were classified in terms of both hump shape (V- or S-shaped) and height. All patients had a DP rhinoplasty by either a push-down (PD) or a let-down (LD) technique. The PD method was used for humps <4 mm and the LD for humps >4 mm. Follow-up evaluations were made with physical examination and photographs at 1 week, 3 months, and 12 months. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 12.68 [1.78] months. Seventy-eight humps were V-shaped and 72 were S-shaped. PD was used for 67 cases, LD for 83 cases. Eight patients (5.3%, 8/150) had a visible dorsal hump problem after DP surgery. Based on their preoperative hump shape, 3 cases were V-shaped and 5 were S-shaped. All recurrent cases had a preoperative hump deformity >4 mm. The revision procedures were as follows: 4 patients had a PD procedure, 3 had a LD procedure, and 1 patient was treated by classic open resection rhinoplasty. CONCLUSIONS: There is a correlation between preoperative hump height and eventual hump recurrence. The complication rate can be decreased with additional technical maneuvers and proper patient selection.