Abstract
Background
The aim of this study was to compare the degree of nasal tip rigidity from different techniques for increasing nasal tip projection.
Methods
Retrospective records of patients who had undergone rhinoplasty were reviewed at the tertiary referral center. 81 patients who had undergone suturing of the medial crura to the extension graft or to the long septum were selected. In group A, fixation was performed at the same level compared to before surgery. In group B, tip grafting was performed to gain 3 mm or more in projection after fixation as done in group A. In group C, the same tip projection was provided by advancing the medial crura on the caudal septum or extension graft. Patients were evaluated with a visual analog scale, based on the rigidity of the nasal tip (0 = very flexible, 10 = very rigid).
Results
When the preoperative and postoperative VAS scores of all groups were compared, postoperative scores were significantly higher than the preoperative scores (p < 0.001). The postoperative scores of group C were higher than those of the other groups. These differences were statistically significant (p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference between groups A and B with regard to the postoperative scores (p = 0.389). However, in group C, the increase between preoperative and postoperative scores was significantly higher than in the other groups (p < 0.001).
Conclusion
Advancing the medial crura on the caudal septum and suturing to gain 3 mm or more of tip projection may result in a more rigid nasal tip. Patients should be informed preoperatively of this potential result.
Level of Evidence IV
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Sen C, Iscen D (2006) Caudal septal advancement for nasal tip projection and support in rhinoplasty. Aesthet Plast Surg 30:135–140
Dobratz EJ, Tran V, Hilger PA (2010) Comparison of techniques used to support the nasal tip and their long-term effects on tip position. Arch Facial Plast Surg 12:172–179
Han SK, Lee DG, Kim JB et al (2004) An anatomic study of nasal tip supporting structures. Ann Plast Surg 52:134–139
Toriumi DM, Checcone MA (2009) New concepts in nasal tip contouring. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 17:55–90
Kridel RW, Scott BA, Foda HM (1999) The tongue-in-groove technique in septorhinoplasty. A 10-year experience. Arch Facial Plast Surg 1:246–256
Guyuron B, Varghai A (2003) Lengthening the nose with a tongue-and-groove technique. Plast Reconstr Surg 111:1533–1539
Tebbetts JB (2008) Primary rhinoplasty, redefining the logic and techniques, 2nd edn. Elsevier, Toronto
Bruschi S, Bocchiotti MA, Verga M, Kefalas N, Fraccalvieri M (2006) Closed rhinoplasty with marginal incision: our experience and results. Aesthet Plast Surg 30:155–158
Lavinsky-Wolff M, Dolci JE, Camargo HL Jr, Manzini M, Petersen S, Romanczuk S, Pizzoni R, Polanczyk CA (2013) Vertical dome division: a quality-of-life outcome study. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 148:758–763
Klinger M, Caviggioli F, Forcellini D, Bandi V, Maione L, Vinci V, Pagliari AV, Klinger F, Mazzola RF (2012) Primary nasal tip surgery: a conservative approach. Aesthet Plast Surg 36:485–490
Lohuis PJ, Faraj-Hakim S, Knobbe A, Duivesteijn W, Bran GM (2012) Split hump technique for reduction of the overprojected nasal dorsum: a statistical analysis on subjective body image in relation to nasal appearance and nasal patency in 97 patients undergoing aesthetic rhinoplasty. Arch Facial Plast Surg 14:346–353
Dyer WK 2nd (2004) Nasal tip support and its surgical modification. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 12:1–13
Ordóñez-Ordóñez LE, Navarro-García US, Angulo-Martínez ES (2010) Nasal septum to columella attachment: a major tip support? Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 143:60–65
Tardy ME (1997) Rhinoplasty: the art and the science. WB Saunders, Philadelphia
Sadeghi M, Saedi B, Arvin Sazegar A, Amiri M (2009) The role of columellar struts to gain and maintain tip projection and rotation: a randomized blinded trial. Am J Rhinol Allergy 23:e47–e50
Kang JG, Ryu J (2009) Nasal tip surgery using a modified septal extension graft by means of extended marginal incision. Plast Reconstr Surg 123:343–352
Daniel RK (2010) Mastering rhinoplasty, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin
Guyuron B (2012) Rhinoplasty, 1st edn. Elsevier, Beijing
Ha RY, Byrd HS (2003) Septal extension grafts revisited: 6-year experience in controlling nasal tip projection and shape. Plast Reconstr Surg 112:1929–1935
Byrd HS, Andochick S, Copit S, Walton KG (1997) Septal extension grafts: a method of controlling tip projection shape. Plast Reconstr Surg 100:999–1010
Cingi C, Songu M, Bal C (2011) Outcomes research in rhinoplasty: body image and quality of life. Am J Rhinol Allergy 25:263–267
Cingi C, Eskiizmir G (2013) Deviated nose attenuates the degree of patient satisfaction and quality of life in rhinoplasty: a prospective controlled study. Clin Otolaryngol 38:136–141
Meningaud JP, Lantieri L, Bertrand JC (2008) Rhinoplasty: an outcome research. Plast Reconstr Surg 121:251–257
Arima LM, Velasco LC, Tiago RS (2011) Crooked nose: outcome evaluations in rhinoplasty. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 77:510–515
Sinno H, Izadpanah A, Thibaudeau S, Christodoulou G, Tahiri Y, Slavin SA, Lin SJ (2012) The impact of living with a functional and aesthetic nasal deformity after primary rhinoplasty: a utility outcomes score assessment. Ann Plast Surg 69:431–434
Acknowledgments
We thank Salih Ergöçen for his help with the statistical analysis of our study.
Conflicts of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Aydogan, F., Tastan, E., Aydin, E. et al. The Effects of Nasal Base Stabilization Techniques on Nasal Tip Rigidity. Aesth Plast Surg 38, 288–294 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-014-0295-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-014-0295-5