Facial Plast Surg 2022; 38(01): 046-056
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1736391
Original Article

Improving Projection of the Nasal Tip in Primary Endonasal Rhinoplasty

Norman Pastorek
1   Facial Plastic Surgery, New York Presbyterian Hospital-Cornell Med Center, New York
,
Patrick Cleveland
2   Department of Facial Plastic Surgery, New York University Medical Center, New York
› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Gaining, improving, and maintaining nasal tip projection is one of the most essential elements of successful endonasal rhinoplasty. For years the hallmark of inadequate nasal tip projection following rhinoplasty has been the Polly beak deformity. Early rhinoplasty technique consisted of intracartilaginous excision of the cephalic margin of the lower lateral cartilages, cartilage and bony hump reduction, and osteotomies. Some of these simple rhinoplasties still look good decades later, however, many are conspicuous in their lack of nasal tip projection. The reason for this inconsistency in rhinoplasty results was the surgeon's inattention to the structural integrity and anatomical position of the LLC. The senior author uses a combination of suture, strut, and cartilage grafting techniques to achieve ideal projection in a manor tailored to each patient's unique anatomic needs.



Publication History

Article published online:
26 October 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 
  • References

  • 1 Constantian MB. The two essential elements for planning tip surgery in primary and secondary rhinoplasty: observations based on review of 100 consecutive patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004; 114 (06) 1571-1581 , discussion 1582–1585
  • 2 Anderson JR. A reasoned approach to nasal base surgery. Arch Otolaryngol 1984; 110 (06) 349-358
  • 3 Williams III EF, Lam SM. A systematic, graduated approach to rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 2002; 18 (04) 215-222
  • 4 Gunter JP. Anatomical observations of the lower lateral cartilages. Arch Otolaryngol 1969; 89 (04) 599-601
  • 5 Gunter JP. Tip rhinoplasty: a personal approach. Facial Plast Surg 1987; 80: 161-174
  • 6 Bradley DT, Park SS. Preoperative analysis and diagnosis for rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2003; 11 (03) 377-390
  • 7 Pastorek N. Technical decisions in rhinoplasty. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1995;112(05):
  • 8 Anderson JR, Willett M. On planning before rhinoplasty. Laryngoscope 1984; 94 (08) 1115-1116
  • 9 Pastorek N. The art of local anesthesia surgery. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2015; 17 (03) 226-227
  • 10 Pastorek N. Surgical management of the boxy tip. Aesthet Surg J 2007; 27 (03) 306-318 , quiz 319–321
  • 11 Lee MR, Geissler P, Cochran S, Gunter JP, Rohrich RJ. Decreasing nasal tip projection in rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014; 134 (01) 41e-49e
  • 12 Toriumi DM, Checcone MA. New concepts in nasal tip contouring. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2009; 17 (01) 55-90 , vi
  • 13 Pastorek N, Ham J. The underprojecting nasal tip: an endonasal approach. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2004; 12 (01) 93-106
  • 14 Shah AR, Miller PJ. Structural approach to endonasal rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 2006; 22 (01) 55-60
  • 15 Carron MA, Zoumalan RA, Pastorek NJ. Measured gain in projection with the extended columellar strut-tip graft in endonasal rhinoplasty. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2013; 15 (03) 187-191
  • 16 Pastorek NJ, Bustillo A, Murphy MR, Becker DG. The extended columellar strut-tip graft. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2005; 7 (03) 176-184