The RhinoCEROS Guidelines: A Practical Tool for Reporting Nasal Anatomy on Computed Tomography Pertaining to Rhinoplasty

Cameron McIntosh; James Stutterheim; Hendrick Prinsloo; Michael Randall; Julia Toman; Francesco Pisapia

doi:10.1055/a-2006-0916

Facial Plastic Surgery, Table of Contents

Facial Plast Surg 2023; 39(04): 362-371
DOI: 10.1055/a-2006-0916

Original Article

The RhinoCEROS Guidelines: A Practical Tool for Reporting Nasal Anatomy on Computed Tomography Pertaining to Rhinoplasty

Cameron McIntosh

¹Edge Day Hospital, Port Elizabeth, South Africa

,

James Stutterheim

²Bay Radiology, Gqeberha, Eastern Cape, South Africa

,

Hendrick Prinsloo

²Bay Radiology, Gqeberha, Eastern Cape, South Africa

,

Michael Randall

³Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Florida

,

Julia Toman

³Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Florida

,

Francesco Pisapia

⁴Department of Maxillofacial sciences, La Sapienza Universitá di Roma, Roma, Italy

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Cone-beam computed tomography (CT) is gaining popularity worldwide due to an increasingly diffuse and affordable in-office availability. It is becoming more commonplace for rhinoplasty surgeons to utilize this imaging as tool for preoperative assessment; however, there is inconsistency among radiologists commenting on specific structures of the nose or nasal cavity as there is currently no standardized reporting protocol. The goal of this article is to present clear guidelines for radiologists to report relevant nasal anatomy in the context of preoperative rhinoplasty evaluation. We have proposed the RhinoCEROS Guidelines, which stands for: Rhinoplasty Cephalometric Evaluation for Radiologic pre-Operative Systematization. This guideline highlights the primary aspects of nasal anatomy on CT that affect rhinoplasty outcomes and will provide radiologists with a straightforward template for reporting this increasingly popular use for CT scan.

Keywords

cone-beam CT - rhinoplasty - preoperative planning

Full Text

References

References
1 Sowder JC, Thomas AJ, Ward PD. Essential anatomy and evaluation for functional rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2017; 25 (02) 141-160
2 Robotti E, Daniel RK, Leone F. Cone-beam computed tomography: a user-friendly, practical roadmap to the planning and execution of every rhinoplasty-a 5-year review. Plast Reconstr Surg 2021; 147 (05) 749e-762e
3 Friedman O, Cekic E, Gunel C. Functional rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2017; 25 (02) 195-199
4 Ferraz MBJ, Sella GCP. Indications for preservation rhinoplasty: avoiding complications. Facial Plast Surg 2021; 37 (01) 45-52
5 Mladina R, Skitarelic N, Poje G. Clinical Implications of Nasal Septal Deformities. Balkan Medical Journal 2015; 32 (02) 137-146
6 Guyuron B, Uzzo CD, Scull H. A practical classification of septonasal deviation and an effective guide to septal surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 1999; 104: 2202-2209 discussion 2210-2212
7 Lin JK, Wheatley FC, Handwerker J, Harris NJ, Wong BJ. Analyzing nasal septal deviations to develop a new classification system: a computed tomography study using MATLAB and OsiriX. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2014; 16 (03) 183-187
8 Teixeira J, Certal V, Chang ET, Camacho M. Nasal septal deviations: a systematic review of classification systems. Plast Surg Int 2016; 2016: 7089123
9 Şahin B, Çomoğlu Ş, Aydemir L, Pamuk S, Keleş Türel MN. The simplified nasal septal deviation evaluation system and nasal obstruction symptom evaluation scale correlation. J Craniofac Surg 2020; 31 (06) 1782-1784
10 Most SP, Rudy SF. Septoplasty: basic and advanced techniques. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2017; 25 (02) 161-169
11 Özdoğan F, Özel HE, Esen E, Altıparmak E, Genç S, Selçuk A. An often neglected area in crooked nose: middle turbinate pneumatization. Rev Bras Otorrinolaringol (Engl Ed) 2017; 83 (05) 563-567
12 Poetker DM, Rhee JS, Mocan BO, Michel MA. Computed tomography technique for evaluation of the nasal valve. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2004; 6 (04) 240-243
13 Shafik AG, Alkady HA, Tawfik GM, Mohamed AM, Rabie TM, Huy NT. Computed tomography evaluation of internal nasal valve angle and area and its correlation with NOSE scale for symptomatic improvement in rhinoplasty. Rev Bras Otorrinolaringol (Engl Ed) 2020; 86 (03) 343-350
14 Lee DC, Shin JH, Kim SW. et al. Anatomical analysis of nasal obstruction: nasal cavity of patients complaining of stuffy nose. Laryngoscope 2013; 123 (06) 1381-1384
15 Bloom JD, Sridharan S, Hagiwara M, Babb JS, White WM, Constantinides M. Reformatted computed tomography to assess the internal nasal valve and association with physical examination. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2012; 14 (05) 331-335
16 Sinkler MA, Wehrle CJ, Elphingstone JW, Magidson E, Ritter EF, Brown JJ. Surgical management of the internal nasal valve: a review of surgical approaches. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2021; 45 (03) 1127-1136
17 Cakmak O, Coşkun M, Celik H, Büyüklü F, Ozlüoğlu LN. Value of acoustic rhinometry for measuring nasal valve area. Laryngoscope 2003; 113 (02) 295-302
18 VanKoevering KK, Rosko AJ, Moyer JS. Osteotomies demystified. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2017; 25 (02) 201-210
19 Al-Sebeih K, Valvoda M, Sobeih A, Al-Sihan M. Perforating and migrating pharyngoesophageal foreign bodies: a series of 5 patients. Ear Nose Throat J 2006; 85 (09) 600-603
20 Ferreira MG, Dias DR, Cardoso L. et al. Dorsal hump reduction based on the new ethmoidal point classification: a clinical and radiological study of the keystone area in 138 patients. Aesthet Surg J 2020; 40 (09) 950-959