Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluation of the different methods used in the treatment of rhinoplastic sequelae

  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Reports on rhinoplastic sequelae are infrequent. Reported incidence rates vary from 5% to 12%. The authors have an overall rate of 8%, with 6.5% of cases involving slight sequelae and 1.5% moderate ones. Various techniques for correction are used, depending on the sequel. Silastic implants have been unsatisfactory over the long term, so generally autogenous implants are used.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Goldman IB: Rhinoplastic sequelae causing nasal obstruction. Arch Otolaryngol83:151, 1966

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Millard DR: Secondary corrective rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg44:545, 1969

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rees TD, Krupp S, Wood-Smith D: Secondary rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg46:322, 1970

    Google Scholar 

  4. Rogers BO: Secondary and tertiary rhinoplasty. Transactions of the 4th International Congress of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Amsterdam: Excerpta Medica Foundation, 1969, pp 1065–1071

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pardina, A.J., Vaca, J.F. Evaluation of the different methods used in the treatment of rhinoplastic sequelae. Aesth. Plast. Surg. 7, 237–239 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01570667

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01570667

Key words

Navigation