Endonasal and External Approaches in Rhinoplasty

  • Mehmet Akif Aksoy
  • Cemal Cingi
  • Norman Pastorek


A common problem a person undergoing rhinoplasty is faced with is the option of a closed versus open procedure. These terms define two surgical options, which require temporary removal of the nasal skin exposing the skeleton. Since the changes that occur to the nasal bridge affect the outer nasal appearance, the surgical method used has a direct effect on the outcomes’ quality of rhinoplastic surgery. In the closed approach (or endonasal rhinoplasty), all incisions are made within the nostril itself, which reduces any appearance of an external scar. One of the major caveats to this technique is that the nasal skin repositioning with this procedure remains difficult and the visibility is limited through the narrow incisions. Therefore, the closed rhinoplastic option lacks the surgical exposure that is associated with the endonasal option. The open (or external rhinoplasty) method requires a small nasal bridge (trans-columellar) incision to join the incisions of the right and left nostril. The hallmark of open rhinoplasty is the trans-columellar incision, which warrants increased visibility and access. Using this method, the nasal skin can be folded upward and the nasal cartilage can be better evaluated in its natural, undisturbed alignment, while minimizing unwanted cartilage alterations. While multiple features can be corrected for an unappealing nose through the closed approach, the open approach has its advantages including versatility, effectiveness, and improved accuracy that outweigh the marginal threat of a visible scar.


Endonasal approach External approach Rhinoplasty Advantages Effectiveness 


  1. 1.
    Davis R. Open vs. closed rhinoplasty. Accessed 16 Aug 2015.
  2. 2.
    Janis JE, Rohrich RJ. Rhinoplasty. In: Thorne CH, editor. Grabb and Smith’s plastic surgery, Chapter 51. 6th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, A Wolters Kluwer Business; 2007. p. 517–32.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Perkins SW. The evolution of the combined use of endonasal and external columellar approaches to rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am. 2004;12:35–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Becker DG. Anatomy, Incisions and approaches: open and closed rhinoplasty. Accessed 16 Aug 2015.
  5. 5.
    Zulker TD, Vuyk H, Adamson PA. External incisions in rhinoplasty a historical review. Faces. 1993;2:75–86.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Goode RL. Surgery of the incompetent nasal valve. Laryngoscope. 1985;95(5):546–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gruber RP. Open rhinoplasty. Clin Plast Surg. 1988;15(1):95–114.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vartanian JA. Basic closed rhinoplasty treatment & management. Granick MS (Chief Editor). Accessed 16 Aug 2015.
  9. 9.
    Daniel RK. The nasal tip: anatomy and aesthetics. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1992;89(2):216–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Xavier R. Modified delivery approach – a new perspective. In: Brenner MJ, editor. Rhinoplasty. Chapter 4. Rijeka, Croatia: InTech; 2011. p. 45–53.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tardy ME Jr, Becker D, Weinberger M. Illusions in rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg. 1995;11(3):117–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Arneja JS. Basic open rhinoplasty treatment & management. In: Granick MS (Ed.). Medscape. . Accessed 16 Aug 2015
  13. 13.
    Toriumi DM, Becker DG. Rhinoplasty dissection manual. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins; 1999.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Johnson CM Jr, Toriumi DM. Open structure rhinoplasty. Philadelphia, PA, Saunders, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Toriumi DM, Johnson CM. Open structure rhinoplasty – Featured technical points and long-term follow-Up. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am. 1993;1(1):1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Adamson PA. Open rhinoplasty. In: Papel ID, Nachlas NE, editors. Facial plastic & reconstructive surgery. St. Louis, MO: Mosby Year Book; 1992. p. 295–304.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Daniel RK. Secondary rhinoplasty following open rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1995;96(7):1539–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gunter JP, Rohrich RJ. External approach for secondary rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1987;80(2):161–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Friedman GD, Gruber RP. A fresh look at the open rhinoplasty technique. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1988;82(6):973–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mehmet Akif Aksoy
    • 1
  • Cemal Cingi
    • 2
  • Norman Pastorek
    • 3
  1. 1.Private Sevgi HospitalOrduTurkey
  2. 2.Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Medical FacultyDepartment of OtorhinolaryngologyEskisehirTurkey
  3. 3.Department of Facial Plastic SurgeryNew York Presbyterian Hospital-Weill Cornell Medical CenterNew York, NYUSA

Personalised recommendations