Revision Rhinoplasty

Thomas Romo III; Jonathan Sonne; Kyle S. Choe; Anthony P. Sclafani

doi:10.1055/s-2004-815649

Facial Plastic Surgery, Inhaltsverzeichnis

Facial Plast Surg 2003; 19(4): 299-308
DOI: 10.1055/s-2004-815649

Revision Rhinoplasty

Thomas Romo III^1,2,3,4 , Jonathan Sonne¹ , Kyle S. Choe¹ , Anthony P. Sclafani^1,2,3

¹Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, New York Eye and Ear Infirmary, New York, NY
²Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, New York Eye and Ear Infirmary, New York, NY
³Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, New York Medical College, Valhalla, NY
⁴Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, NY

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Revision rhinoplasty can be one of the most complicated procedures performed by the facial plastic surgeon. As septal cartilage is often not available in revision procedures, grafting material is often needed. This material can come in the form of autogenous bone and cartilage. Allografts also can be used, including mersilene, expanded polytetrafluoroethylene, and porous high-density polyethylene (PHDPE). In this article, emphasis is placed on the senior author's method in evaluating candidates for revision rhinoplasty as well as techniques using PHDPE. In addition, the properties of the more commonly used allografts are described, including the advantages and disadvantages of using each material in revision rhinoplasty procedures. In comparing the various alloplastic materials available, it is shown that PHDPE has properties that make it an excellent implant for revision rhinoplasty.

KEYWORDS

Revision rhinoplasty - rhinoplasty - porous high-density polyethylene

Volltext

Referenzen

REFERENCES

1 Romo III T, Millman A L. Aesthetic Facial Plastic Surgery. New York: Thieme Medical Publishers 2000
2 Gunter J P, Roohrich R J. Augmentation rhinoplasty: dorsal onlay grafting material using autogenous septal cartilage. Plast Reconstr Surg . 1990; 86 39-45
3 Johnson C, Toriumi D M. Open Structure Rhinoplasty. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1989
4 Daniel R K. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Rhinoplasty. Boston: Little Brown 1993: 466
5 Romo T, Jablonski R D. Nasal reconstruction using split calvarial grafts. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg . 1992; 107 622-630
6 Gross E J, Hamilton M H, Ackermann K. et al . Mersilene mesh chin augmentation. Arch Facial Plast Surg . 1999; 1 183-189
7 Colton J J, Beckhuis G J. Use of Mersilene mesh in nasal augmentation. Facial Plast Surg . 1992; 8 149-156
8 Farous N, Samaha M, Yoskovitch A. Dacron implants in rhinoplasty. Arch Facial Plast Surg . 2002; 4 149-156
9 Owsley T G, Taylor C O. The use of Gore-Tex for nasal augmentation: a retrospective analysis of 106 patients. Plast Reconstr Surg . 1994; 94 241-248
10 Romo T, Sclafani A P, Sabini P. Use of porous high-density polyethylene in revision rhinoplasty and in the platyrrhine nose. Aesthet Plast Surg . 1998; 22 211-221
11 Sclafani A P, Romo T, Silver L. Clinical and histological behavior of exposed porous high-density polyethylene implants. Plast Reconstr Surg . 1997; 99 41-50
12 Romo T, McLaughlin L A, Levine J M. et al . Nasal implants: autogenous, semisynthetic, and synthetic. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am . 2002; 10 155-166
13 Roussett J D. The Rhinoplasty. Paris: G Steinhert 1904
14 Choe K S, Stucki-McCormick S U. Chin augmentation. Facial Plast Surg . 2000; 16 45-54
15 Sevastianov V I. Role of protein adsorption in blood biocompatibility of polymers. Crit Rev Biocompat . 1988; 4 109-154
16 Tang L, Lucas A H, Eaton J W. Inflammatory responses to implanted biomaterials: role of surface-adsorbed immunoglobulin G. J Lab Clin Med . 1993; 122 292-300
17 Tang L, Eaton J W. Inflammatory response to biomaterials. Am J Clin Pathol . 1995; 103 466-471
18 Brown B L, Kern E B, Neel H B. Transplantation of fresh allografts (homografts) of crushed and uncrushed cartilage and bone: a 1-year analysis in rabbits. Laryngoscope . 1980; 90 1521-1533
19 Jobe R, Iverson R, Vistnes L. Bone deformation beneath alloplastic implants. Plast Reconstr Surg . 1973; l51 169-175
20 Friedland J A, Coccaro P J, Converse J M. Retrospective cephalometric analysis of mandibular bone absorption under silicone rubber chin implants. Plast Reconstr Surg . 1976; 57 144-151
21 Milward T M. The fate of Silastic and vitathrene nasal implants. Br J Plast Surg . 1972; 25 276-278
22 Deva A K, Merten S, Chang L. Silicone in nasal augmentation rhinoplasty: a decade of clinical experience. Plast Resonstr Surg . 1998; 102 1230-1237
23 McCollough E G, Hom D B, Weigel M T, Anderson J R. Augmentation mentoplasty using Mersilene mesh. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg . 1990; 116 1154-1158
24 Maas C S, Gnepp D R, Bumpous H. Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (Gore-Tex) in facial augmentation. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg . 1993; 119 1008-1114
25 Silver F H, Maas C S. Biology of synthetic facial implant materials. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am . 1994; 2 241-253
26 Levine B, Berman W E. The current status of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (Gore-Tex) in facial plastic surgery. Ear Nose Throat J . 1995; 74 681-684
27 Stoll W. The use of polytetrafluoroethylene for particular augmentation of the nasal dorsum. Aesth Plast Surg . 1991; 15 233-236
28 Waldman S R. Gore-Tex for augmentation of the nasal dorsum: a preliminary report. Ann Plast Surg . 1991; 26 520-525
29 Maas C S, Gneep D R, Bumpous J. Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (Gore-Tex) soft-tissue patch in facial augmentation. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg . 1993; 119 1008-1014
30 Mendelsohn M, Dunlop G. Gore-Tex augmentation grafting in rhinoplasty: is it safe?. J Otolaryngol . 1998; 27 337-341
31 Godin M S, Waldman S R, Johnson C M. Nasal augmentation using Gore-Tex: a 10-year experience. Arch Facial Plast Surg . 1999; 1 118-121
32 Spector M, Flemming W R, Sauer B W. Early tissue infiltrate in porous polyethylene implants into bone: a scanning electron microscope study. J Biomed Mater Res . 1975; 9 537-545
33 Wellisz T, Kanel G, Anooshian R V. Characteristics of tissue response to Medpor porous polyethylene implants in the human facial skeleton. J Long-Term Effect Med Implants . 1993; 3 223-235
34 Maas C S, Merwin G E, Wilson J. et al . Comparison of biomaterials for facial bone augmentation. Arch Otorhinol Head Neck Surg . 1990; 116 551-556
35 Lacey M, Antonyshyn O. Use of porous high-density polyethylene implants in temporal contour reconstruction. J Craniofacial Surg . 1993; 4 74-78
36 Romano J J, Iliff N T, Manson P N. Use of Medpor porous polyethylene implants in 140 patients with facial fractures. J Craniofacial Surg . 1993; 4 142-147
37 Sclafani A P, Thomas J R, Cox A J. et al . Clinical and histologic response of subcutaneous expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (Gore-Tex) and porous high density polyethylene (Medpor) implants to acute and early infection. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg . 1997; 123 328-336
38 Beekhuis G J. Saddle nose deformity: etiology, prevention, and treatment; augmentation rhinoplasty with polyamide. Laryngoscope . 1974; 84 2-42
39 Stucker F J. Use of implantation in facial deformities. Laryngoscope . 1977; 87 1523-1527