Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

, Volume 27, Issue 6, pp 438–445 | Cite as

Implications for Nasal Recontouring: Nasion Position Preferences as Determined by a Survey of White North Americans

  • Arian Mowlavi
  • D. Garth Meldrum
  • Bradon J. Wilhelmi
Article

Abstract

White North American men (n = 75) and women (n = 75) were surveyed to investigate gender specific preferences of nasion position, which may aid plastic surgeons in nasal shaping during rhinoplasty. The subjects were asked to rank preferences of various nasion positions from life-size, scaled, sketched male and female profiles. Nasion positions with regard to height (anterior projection) and level (vertical position) were altered, whereas all other facial and nasal anthropometric measurements were held constant. The nasion heights were drawn at 7, 10, and 13 mm anteriorly to the corneal plane, and the nasion levels were drawn at the supratarsal fold (ST), upper lid ciliary margin (CM), midpupil (MP), and lower limbus (LL). The rank selections made by the female and male subjects of both gender profiles demonstrated statistical significance, as demonstrated by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) of ranks (p < 0.001). Further analysis using a post-Dunn test was completed to delineate significant gender specific preferences for the aesthetic nasion level and height. Female nasion levels were preferred at CM or MP over LL or ST on the basis of female ranks, and at ST, CM, or MP over LL on the basis of male ranks (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). Additionally, female nasion heights were preferred at 10 mm > 13 mm > 7 mm anterior to the corneal plane on the basis of both female and male ranks (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). Male nasion levels were preferred at ST, CM, or MP over LL on the basis of both male and female ranks (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). Male nasion heights were preferred at 10 mm > 13 mm > 7 mm anterior to the corneal plane by both male and female ranks (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). In summary, both the male and female subjects strongly disliked a low nasion height of 7 mm and a low nasion level placed at LL for both gender profiles. Both the male and female subjects were most particular concerning nasion height, preferring a 10-mm projection and strongly disliking a deeper 7-mm height for both male and female profiles. Both the male and female subjects were more tolerant of nasion level alterations. Whereas the male subjects tolerated nasion levels at ST, CM, or MP for either gender profile, the female subjects preferred only nasion levels at CM and MP for the female gender. Overall, these findings may lend support to recent trends in radix augmentation during rhinoplasty, especially among male patients.

Keywords

Rhinoplasty Nasal contouring Radix 

References

  1. 1.
    Becker, DG, Pastorek, NJ 2001The radix graft in cometic surgery.Arch Facial Plast Surg3115119CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Borman, H, Ozgur, F, Gursu, G 1999Evaluation of soft tissue morphology of the face in 1,050 young adults.Ann Plast Surg42280288PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Byrd, S, Hobar, PC 1993Rhinoplasty: a practical guide for surgical planning.Plast Reconstr Surg91642654PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Constantian, MB 1989An alternative strategy for reducing the large nasal base.Plast Reconstr Surg834152PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Constantian, MB 2000Four common anatomic variants that predispose to unfavorable rhinoplasty results: a study based on 150 consecutive secondary rhinoplasties.Plast Reconstr Surg105316333PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Daniel, RK 1996

    The radix.

    ., . eds. Aesthetic plastic surgery rhinoplasty.Little, Brown, and CompanyBoston151168
    Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Daniel RK: The radix and the nasofrontal angle. In: Dallas Rhinoplasty Symposium. pp 331–340, 1996Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Daniel, RK, Farkas, LG 1988Rhinoplasty: image and reality.Clinc Plast Surg15110Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Farkas, LG 1981

    Results.

    ., . eds. Anthropometry of the head and face in medicine.ElsevierNorth Holland, New York2830
    Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Farkas, LG, Hreckzko, TA, Kolar, JC, Munro, IR, Chir, B 1984Vertical and horizontal proportions of the face in young adult North american Caucasians: revision of neoclassical canons..75328336Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Farkas, LG, Kolar, JC, Munro, IR 1986Geography of the nose: a morphometric study.Aesthetic Plast Surg10191223PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Farkas, LG, Munro, IR 1987Anthropometric facial proportions in medicine.ThuomasSpringfield, ILl67169Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Farkas, LG, Shom, P, Katic, MJ, Munro, RI, Chir, B 1985Inclinations of the facial profile: art versus reality.Plast Reconstr Surg75509519PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Goldman, IB 1961Removal of the nasal hump.Arch Otolaryngol745155Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gunter JP: Facial analysis for the rhinoplasty patient. In: Dallas Rhinoplasty Symposium. 1996: 23-24.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Guryon, B 1988Precision rhinoplasty: Part I. The role of life-size photographs and soft tissue cephalometric analysis.Plast Reocnstr Surg81489499Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Guryon, B 1988Precision rhinoplasty: Part II. Prediction.Plast. Reconstr Surg81500550PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lessard, M-L, Daniel, RK 1985Surgical anatomy of septorhinoplasty.Arch Otolaryngol1112529PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Powell, N, Humphreys, B 1984Proportions of the aesthetic face.Thieme-StrattonNew York6467Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sheen, JH 1984

    Radix.

    ., . eds. Aesthetic rhinoplasty.Quality Medical PublishingSt. Louis7074
    Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sheen, JH 1987Th radix as a reference in rhinoplasty.Perspect Plast Surg13335Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sheen, JH, Sheen, AP 1987Aesthetic rhinoplasty.St. LouisMosby132213271142–1165, 808–826Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tardy, ME, Brown, R 1997Rhinoplasty: the Art and the science.WB SaundersPhiladelphia, PA453459Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Webster, RC, Davidson, TM, Smith, RC 1979Nasofrontal angle changes in rhinoplasty.Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg8795108PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yellin, SA 1997Aesthetics for the next millennium.Facial Plast Surg13231239PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arian Mowlavi
    • 1
  • D. Garth Meldrum
    • 1
  • Bradon J. Wilhelmi
    • 1
  1. 1.The Plastic Surgery InstituteSouthern Illinois University, School of MedicineSpringfieldUSA

Personalised recommendations