Literature DB >> 9105357

The lateral nasal osteotomy in rhinoplasty: an anatomic endoscopic comparison of the external versus the internal approach.

R J Rohrich1, J J Minoli, W P Adams, L H Hollier.   

Abstract

A precise and reproducible lateral osteotomy is a requirement for successful rhinoplasty. Two basic techniques have evolved: the external perforated method and the internal continuous method. The literature supporting the external perforated technique maintains that it contributes to a controlled, stable fracture and produces less nasal airway narrowing, hemorrhage, edema, and ecchymosis; however, the continuous internal method is used by many rhinoplasty surgeons. Our study was designed to compare the two techniques in the fresh cadaver nose using a blinded endoscopic evaluation of the nasal mucosa after the osteotomies were performed by one of these two techniques. Nineteen fresh cadaver heads had an external perforated lateral osteotomy performed on one side and an internal continuous lateral osteotomy performed on the alternate side by an investigator with experience in the use of both osteotomies. In a blinded fashion, four different investigators used nasal endoscopy to detect mucosal perforations and bony irregularities. Eleven percent of the perforated osteotomies resulted in mucosal tearing as opposed to 74 percent of the continuous osteotomies (p < 0.001). This anatomic study confirms our clinical experience that the external perforated osteotomy results in a more controlled fracture with less intranasal trauma and can minimize the associated morbidity (hemorrhage, edema, and ecchymosis) in the rhinoplasty patient.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9105357     DOI: 10.1097/00006534-199704001-00015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 0032-1052            Impact factor:   4.730


  13 in total

1.  A comparison of piezosurgery with conventional techniques for internal osteotomy.

Authors:  I Koçak; R Doğan; O Gökler
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2017-03-11       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 2.  Complications Associated with Rhinoplasty: An Umbrella Review of Meta-analyses.

Authors:  Beiyi Wu; Shanshan Chen; Kaibo Sun; Xuewen Xu
Journal:  Aesthetic Plast Surg       Date:  2021-09-29       Impact factor: 2.708

3.  [Comparison of piezoelectric and conventional osteotomy in rhinoplasty : A systematic review].

Authors:  M Wähmann; F Riedel; M Kovacevic; A Hopf; A E Albers
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 1.284

4.  [Techniques for correction of the nasal dorsum].

Authors:  W Heppt
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 1.284

5.  Rhinoplasty - indications and techniques.

Authors:  Abel-Jan Tasman
Journal:  GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2008-03-14

6.  Restorative procedures in disturbed function of the upper airways - nasal breathing.

Authors:  Gunter Mlynski
Journal:  GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2005-10-17

7.  Comparative study of continuous lateral osteotomy and microperforating osteotomy in patients undergoing primary rhinoplasty.

Authors:  Diego Sherlon Pizzamiglio; Cezar Augusto Sarraf Berger
Journal:  Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2012-07

8.  Lateral nasal osteotomy: a comparative study between the use of osteotome and a diamond surgical burr - a cadaver study.

Authors:  Alireza Ghassemi; Ashraf Ayoub; Ali Modabber; Behnam Bohluli; Andreas Prescher
Journal:  Head Face Med       Date:  2013-12-19       Impact factor: 2.151

9.  Complications of Internal Continuous and Perforating External Osteotomy in Primary Rhinoplasty.

Authors:  Sadrollah Motamed; Alireza Saberi; Feyzollah Niazi; Hojjat Molaei
Journal:  World J Plast Surg       Date:  2017-05

10.  Visible Perforating Lateral Osteotomy: Internal Perforating Technique with Wide Periosteal Dissection.

Authors:  Bong Il Rho; In Ho Lee; Eun Soo Park
Journal:  Arch Plast Surg       Date:  2016-01-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.