Download PDF
Facial Plast Surg 2023; 39(04): 333-361
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1768654
Original Article

State of the Evidence for Preservation Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review

Nicole G. DeSisto
1   Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
,
Tyler S. Okland
1   Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
,
Priyesh N. Patel
1   Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
,
Sam P. Most
2   Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Preservation rhinoplasty encompasses a number of techniques that minimize disruption of the native cartilaginous and soft tissue nasal architecture. These techniques have gained popularity resulting in an increase in publications relevant to preservation rhinoplasty. However, many studies that present patient outcomes are of low-level evidence and do not incorporate validated patient-reported outcome measures. While these studies do consistently report positive outcomes, there are few high-level comparative studies that support the theoretical benefits of preservation relative to structural rhinoplasty. As contemporary preservation rhinoplasty techniques will continue to evolve and become incorporated into clinical practice, there will be the need for parallel emphasis on robust clinical studies to delineate the value of these methods.

Keywords

preservation rhinoplasty - dorsal preservation - structural preservation - cartilage preservation - subperichondrial dissection


Publication History

Article published online:
09 May 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

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

 

  • References

  • 1 Kosins AM, Daniel RK. Decision making in preservation rhinoplasty: a 100 case series with one-year follow-up. Aesthet Surg J 2020; 40 (01) 34-48
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Saban Y, Daniel RK, Polselli R, Trapasso M, Palhazi P. Dorsal preservation: the push down technique reassessed. Aesthet Surg J 2018; 38 (02) 117-131
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Patel PN, Abdelwahab M, Most SP. A review and modification of dorsal preservation rhinoplasty techniques. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2020; 22 (02) 71-79
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Abdelwahab M, Patel PN. Conventional resection versus preservation of the nasal dorsum and ligaments: an anatomic perspective and review of the literature. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2021; 29 (01) 15-28
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Patel PN, Kandathil CK, Buba CM. et al. Global practice patterns of dorsal preservation rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2022; 24 (03) 171-177
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Alan MA, Kahraman ME, Yüksel F, Yücel A. Comparison of dorsal preservation and dorsal reduction rhinoplasty: analysis of nasal patency and aesthetic outcomes by rhinomanometry, NOSE and SCHNOS scales. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2023; 47 (02) 728-734
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Almazov I, Rovira RV, Farhadov V. Closed piezo preservation rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2022; 46 (03) 1342-1350
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Azimov G. Cartilaginous dorsum repositioning technique. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2021; 9 (01) e3151
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Cabbarzade C. A new algorithm for hump reduction according to dynamics of dorsal preservation. Aesthet Surg J 2019; 39 (12) NP547-NP549
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Cakir B, Oreroğlu AR, Doğan T, Akan M. A complete subperichondrial dissection technique for rhinoplasty with management of the nasal ligaments. Aesthet Surg J 2012; 32 (05) 564-574
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Dewes W, Zappelini CEM, Ferraz MBJ, Neves JC. Conservative surgery of the nasal dorsum: septal pyramidal adjustment and repositioning. Facial Plast Surg 2021; 37 (01) 22-28
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Erdal AI, Genç İG. Transection of Pitanguy's midline ligament to avoid supratip depression in closed-approach low-septal-resection dorsal preservation rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J 2023; 43 (02) NP84-NP90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Ferreira MG, Santos M, Carmo E DO. et al. Spare roof technique versus component dorsal hump reduction: a randomized prospective study in 250 primary rhinoplasties, aesthetic and functional outcomes. Aesthet Surg J 2021; 41 (03) 288-300
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Ferreira MG, Monteiro D, Reis C, Almeida e Sousa C. Spare roof technique: a middle third new technique. Facial Plast Surg 2016; 32 (01) 111-116
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Ishida J, Ishida LC, Ishida LH, Vieira JC, Ferreira MC. Treatment of the nasal hump with preservation of the cartilaginous framework. Plast Reconstr Surg 1999; 103 (06) 1729-1733 , discussion 1734–1735
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Ishida LC, Ishida J, Ishida LH, Tartare A, Fernandes RK, Gemperli R. Nasal hump treatment with cartilaginous push-down and preservation of the bony cap. Aesthet Surg J 2020; 40 (11) 1168-1178
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Kosins AM. Expanding indications for dorsal preservation rhinoplasty with cartilage conversion techniques. Aesthet Surg J 2021; 41 (02) 174-184
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Kosins AM. Preservation rhinoplasty: Open or closed?. Aesthet Surg J 2022; 42 (09) 990-1008
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Levin M, Ziai H, Roskies M. Patient satisfaction following structural versus preservation rhinoplasty: a systematic review. Facial Plast Surg 2020; 36 (05) 670-678
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Neves JC, Arancibia-Tagle D. Avoiding aesthetic drawbacks and stigmata in dorsal line preservation rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 2021; 37 (01) 65-75
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Öztürk G. Hybrid preservation rhinoplasty: combining mix-down and semi let-push down techniques. J Craniofac Surg 2022; 33 (06) 1885-1889
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Öztürk G. Semi-let-down and semi-push-down preservation techniques: maintaining the intactness of the distal region. Aesthet Surg J 2021; 41 (06) NP267-NP280
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Öztürk G. New approaches for the let-down technique. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2020; 44 (05) 1725-1736
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Öztürk G. Push-down technique without osteotomy: a new approach. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2020; 44 (03) 891-901
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Öztürk G. Prevention of nasal deviation related to preservation rhinoplasty in non-deviated noses using suturing approaches. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2021; 45 (04) 1693-1702
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Öztürk G. Push down technique with ostectomy. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 2021; 66 (04) 329-337
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Öztürk G. Combination of the push-down and let-down techniques: mix-down approaches. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2021; 45 (03) 1140-1149
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Öztürk G. Partial let-down and push-down techniques with complete cartilage preservation. J Craniofac Surg 2021; 32 (03) 1126-1131
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Özücer B, Çam OH. The effectiveness of asymmetric dorsal preservation for correction of I-shaped crooked nose deformity in comparison to conventional technique. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2020; 22 (04) 286-293
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Patel PN, Abdelwahab M, Most SP. Dorsal preservation rhinoplasty: method and outcomes of the modified subdorsal strip method. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2021; 29 (01) 29-37
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Patel PN, Kandathil CK, Abdelhamid AS, Buba CM, Most SP. Matched cohort comparison of dorsal preservation and conventional hump resection rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2022; Oct 31: 1-11
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Patel PN, Abdelwahab M, Most SP. Combined functional and preservation rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2021; 29 (01) 113-121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Pirsig W, Königs D. Wedge resection in rhinosurgery: a review of the literature and long-term results in a hundred cases. Rhinology 1988; 26 (02) 77-88
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Qaradaxi KA, Mohammed AA, Mohammed HN. The outcome of V vs. S shaped nasal deformity in preservation rhinoplasty; a comparative study. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 2022; 67 (04) 239-244
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Robotti E, Chauke-Malinga NY, Leone F. A modified dorsal split preservation technique for nasal humps with minor bony component: a preliminary report. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2019; 43 (05) 1257-1268
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Rodrigues Dias D, Santos M, Sousa E Castro S, Almeida E Sousa C, Gonçalves Ferreira M. The spare roof technique as a new approach to the crooked nose. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2022; 24 (03) 178-184
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Rodriguez CA, Al-Sakkaf AM, Verbauvede M. Rhinoplasty with recycled dorsum preservation: technique and outcomes. Arch Plast Surg 2022; 49 (05) 563-568
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Santos M, Rego ÂR, Coutinho M, Sousa CAE, Ferreira MG. Spare roof technique in reduction rhinoplasty: prospective study of the first one hundred patients. Laryngoscope 2019; 129 (12) 2702-2706
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Stergiou G, Fortuny CG, Schweigler A, Finocchi V, Saban Y, Tremp M. A multivariate analysis after preservation rhinoplasty (PR) - a prospective study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2022; 75 (01) 369-373
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Stergiou G, Schweigler A, Finocchi V, Fortuny CG, Saban Y, Tremp M. Quality of life (QoL) and outcome after preservation rhinoplasty (PR) using the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) Questionnaire - a prospective observational single-centre study. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2022; 46 (04) 1773-1779
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Taglialatela Scafati S, Regalado-Briz A. Piezo-assisted dorsal preservation in rhinoplasty: when and why. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2022; 46 (05) 2389-2397
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Taş S. Dorsal roof technique for dorsum preservation in rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J 2020; 40 (03) 263-275
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Taş BM, Erden B. Comparison of nasal functional outcomes of let down rhinoplasty and open technical rhinoplasty using spreader graft. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2021; 278 (02) 371-377
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Tham T, Bhuiya S, Wong A, Zhu D, Romo T, Georgolios A. Clinical outcomes in dorsal preservation rhinoplasty: a meta-analysis. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2022; 24 (03) 187-194
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Tuncel U, Aydogdu O. The probable reasons for dorsal hump problems following let-down/push-down rhinoplasty and solution proposals. Plast Reconstr Surg 2019; 144 (03) 378e-385e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Tuncel U, Kurt A, Saban Y. Dorsal preservation surgery: a novel modification for dorsal shaping and hump reduction. Aesthet Surg J 2022; 42 (11) 1252-1261
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Tuncel U, Aydogdu IO, Kurt A. Reducing dorsal hump recurrence following push down-let down rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J 2021; 41 (04) 428-437
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Saban Y, de Salvador S. Guidelines for dorsum preservation in primary rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 2021; 37 (01) 53-64
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Küçüker I, Özmen S, Kaya B, Ak B, Demir A. Are grafts necessary in rhinoplasty? Cartilage flaps with cartilage-saving rhinoplasty concept. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2014; 38 (02) 275-281
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Öztürk G. Scroll ligament preservation and improvement in nasal tip with the room concept. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2020; 44 (02) 491-500
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Sazgar AA, Most SP. Stabilization of nasal tip support in nasal tip reduction surgery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2011; 145 (06) 932-934
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Öztürk G. Improvement of alar concavity with scroll ligament preservation: sandwich technique. Aesthet Surg J 2020; 40 (10) 1064-1075
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Tebbetts JB. Rethinking the logic and techniques of primary tip rhinoplasty. A perspective of the evolution of surgery of the nasal tip. Clin Plast Surg 1996; 23 (02) 245-253
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Murakami CS, Barrera JE, Most SP. Preserving structural integrity of the alar cartilage in aesthetic rhinoplasty using a cephalic turn-in flap. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2009; 11 (02) 126-128
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Langsdon P, Schroeder R, Rayess H, Clinkscales W. Lateral crural setback: a preservation technique to increase tip rotation. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2022; 24 (03) 247-248
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Gruber RP, Zang A, Mohebali K. Preventing alar retraction by preservation of the lateral crus. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010; 126 (02) 581-588
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Foulad A, Volgger V, Wong B. Lateral crural tensioning for refinement of the nasal tip and increasing alar stability: a case series. Facial Plast Surg 2017; 33 (03) 316-323
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Abdelwahab M, Patel P, Kandathil CK, Wadhwa H, Most SP. Effect of lateral crural procedures on nasal wall stability and tip aesthetics in rhinoplasty. Laryngoscope 2021; 131 (06) E1830-E1837
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Tellioglu AT, Cimen K. Turn-in folding of the cephalic portion of the lateral crus to support the alar rim in rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2007; 31 (03) 306-310
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Bulut F. Cephalic lateral crural advancement flap. Arch Plast Surg 2021; 48 (02) 158-164
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Alkarzae M, Bafaqeeh SA. Turn-in flap: 10 years' experience of a single institution in Saudi Arabia. Cureus 2020; 12 (01) e6593
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Boccieri A, Marianetti TM. Barrel roll technique for the correction of long and concave lateral crura. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2010; 12 (06) 415-421
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Sazgar AA. Lateral crural setback with cephalic turn-in flap: a method to treat the drooping nose. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2010; 12 (06) 427-430
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Sazgar AA. Horizontal reduction using a cephalic hinged flap of the lateral crura: a method to treat the bulbous nasal tip. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2010; 34 (05) 642-645
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Paquet CA, Choroomi S, Frankel AS. An analysis of lateral crural repositioning and its effect on alar rim position. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2016; 18 (02) 89-94
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Abdelwahab M, Most SP. The miniature lateral crural strut graft: efficacy of a novel technique in tip plasty. Laryngoscope 2020; 130 (11) 2581-2588
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Foda HMT. Management of the droopy tip: a comparison of three alar cartilage-modifying techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 112 (05) 1408-1417 , discussion 1418–1421
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Foda HM, Kridel RW. Lateral crural steal and lateral crural overlay: an objective evaluation. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1999; 125 (12) 1365-1370
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Gentile P, Cervelli V. Cartilage remodeling in nasal tip rhinoplasty using “lateral crural steal” and “tongue in groove” strategies: a randomized controlled trial. J Craniofac Surg 2022; 33 (04) 1099-1103
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Ghazipour A, Ghadakzadeh S, Karimian N. The comparison between two different combinations of alar cartilage-modifying techniques: is lateral crural steal the choice?. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2009; 266 (03) 391-395
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Darzi E, Sadeghi M, Amali A, Saedi B. Effect of lateral crural cut overlay and medial crural cut and overlay in creating and maintaining tip projection and rotation: a randomised single-blind trial. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2021; 59 (09) 1067-1073
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Cabbarzade C. Skin tensioning concept in rhinoplasty using a semifixed support mechanism. J Craniofac Surg 2023; 34 (01) e28-e32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar