Definition of “Gender Angle” in Caucasian Population
- 19 Downloads
The goal of this study report is to define the “gender angle,” a new angle which represents the masculine or feminine nasal shape, for performing a gender-oriented rhinoplasty. The use of the “gender angle” in Caucasian patients will help the plastic surgeon in the search for a suitable nose for the patient’s face and above all for the search for maximum patient satisfaction.
Materials and Methods
The study population was obtained from Caucasian patients who had undergone rhinoplasty between January 1986 and September 2016 at our department. Patients answered the Italian version of the FACE-Q outcome instrument on post-rhinoplasty satisfaction with their nose. Anthropometric measurements were taken retrospectively by AutoCAD for MAC on a photograph of the profile view taken postoperatively at the last follow-up.
A total of 1774 (706 male and 1068 female) patients satisfied the inclusion criteria and were finally enrolled in this study. We identified a gender-specific angle ranging from 168° to 182° for the male nose and from 160° to 178° for the female nose. We subdivided all study patients into 3 ranges of angles as follows: male nose, range 1 = 168°–172°, range 2 = 173°–177°, range 3 = 178°–182°; female nose, range 1 = 160°–166°, range 2 = 167°–171°, range 3 = 172°–178°. All study patients completed the FACE-Q rhinoplasty postoperative module. Analysis was performed of the FACE-Q results and the angle obtained for each nose. The most satisfactory angle range for male patients was range 3 (P = 0.01) and for the female patients was range 2 (P = 0.01).
The “gender angle” might be a parameter that effectively provides the optimal cosmetic result for male and female patients who undergo rhinoplasty.
Level of Evidence IV
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors - www.springer.com/00266.
KeywordsPatient satisfaction Quality of life Nose Rhinoplasty Nasal angle
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of our University. This article contains studies on human participants performed by any of the authors, and each subject provided informed written consent before participating in the study.
- 5.Barone M, Cogliandro A, Persichetti P (2017) Role of rhinoplasty in transsexual patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 41(3):700–713Google Scholar
- 14.Price MA, Goldstein GD (1997) The use of a digital imaging system in a dermatology surgery practice. Dermatol Surg 23:31–32Google Scholar
- 18.Barone M, Cogliandro A, Persichetti P (2018) Patient-reported outcome measures following rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. https://doi.org/10.1097/prs.0000000000004743. (Epub ahead of print)
- 24.Noureai SA, Randhawa P, Andrews PJ, Saleh HA (2007) The role of nasal feminization rhinoplasty in male-to-female gender reassignment. Arch Facial Plast Surg 9:318–320Google Scholar
- 26.Bartlett SP, Wornom I III, Whitaker LA (1991) Evaluation of facial skeletal aesthetics and surgical planning. Clin Plast Surg 18:1–9Google Scholar
- 28.Carvalho B, Ballin AC, Becker RV, Berger CA, Hurtado JG, Mocellin M (2012) Rhinoplasty and facial asymmetry: analysis of subjective and anthropometric factors in the Caucasian nose. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 16:445–451Google Scholar
- 30.Berger CA, Freitas Rda S, Malafaia O, Pinto JS, Macedo Filho ED, Mocellin M, Fagundes MS (2015) Prospective study of the surgical techniques used in primary rhinoplasty on the Caucasian nose and comparison of the preoperative and postoperative anthropometric nose measurements. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 19:34–41Google Scholar