Advertisement

Rhinometry: Clinical Index for Evaluation of the Nose

  • Abdoljalil Kalantar-Hormozi
  • Arash Beiraghi-Toosi
Chapter

Abstract

Preoperative planning and postoperative outcome assessment in rhinoplasty are important. For preoperative planning, some standard relationships are defined and evaluated primarily with standard photographs, but photographs do not necessarily reflect reality. Outcome assessment, on the other hand, is mostly subjective, and again, even photographic analyses may not address real changes after rhinoplasty. “Rhinometry” is introduced as a clinical method for preoperative evaluations and postoperative judgments, and rhinometric parameters are defined. It can change the ideas of plastic surgeons about the changes their operative approaches accomplish and can be a very useful guide for patients. It is recommended as a part of the pre- and postoperative physical examination of patients undergoing rhinoplasty.

Keywords

Preoperative Planning Nasal Bone Alar Base Alar Cartilage Open Rhinoplasty 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Bull TR (1983) Rhinoplasty: aesthetics, ethics and airway. J Laryngol Otol 97(10):901–916PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Farkas LG, Hreczko TA, Kolar JC, Munro IR (1985) Vertical and horizontal proportions of the face in young adult North American Caucasians: revision of neoclassical canons. Plast Reconstr Surg 75(3):328–338PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Leong SC, White PS (2006) A comparison of aesthetic proportions between the healthy Caucasian nose and the aesthetic ideal. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 59(3):248–252PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yaremchuk M (2006) Facial skeletal augmentation. In: Mathes S (ed) Plastic surgery, 2nd edn. Saunders, Philadelphia, p 405Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pearson DC, Adamson PA (2004) The ideal nasal profile: rhinoplasty patients vs the general public. Arch Facial Plast Surg 6(4):257–262PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bagal AA, Adamson PA (2002) Revision rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 18(4):233–244PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Byrd HS, Burt JD (2002) Dimensional approach to rhinoplasty: perfecting the aesthetic balance between the nose and chin. In: Gunter JP, Rohrich RJ, Adams WP (eds) Dallas rhinoplasty: nasal surgery by the masters, 1st edn. Quality Medical Publishing, St. Louis, pp 118–123Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Constantian MB (2006) Closed rhinoplasty: current techniques, theory, and applications. In: Mathes SJ (ed) Plastic surgery, 2nd edn. Saunders, Philadelphia, p 524Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rohrich R, Muzaffar AR (2006) Primary rhinoplasty. In: Mathes S (ed) Plastic surgery, 2nd edn. Saunders, Philadelphia, p 427Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sheen J (1987) Aesthetic rhinoplasty, 1st edn. Mosby, St. LouisGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dziewulski P, Dujon D, Spyriounis P, Griffiths RW, Shaw JD (1995) A retrospective analysis of the results of 218 consecutive rhinoplasties. Br J Plast Surg 48(7):451–454PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guyuron B, Bokhari F (1996) Patient satisfaction following rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 20(2):153–157PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Alsarraf R (2002) Outcomes instruments in facial plastic surgery. Facial Plast Surg 18(2):77–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Klassen A, Jenkinson C, Fitzpatrick R, Goodacre T (1998) Measuring quality of life in cosmetic surgery patients with a condition-specific instrument: the Derriford Scale. Br J Plast Surg 51(5):380–384PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Most SP, Alsarraf R, Larrabee WF Jr (2002) Outcomes of facial cosmetic procedures. Facial Plast Surg 18(2): 119–124PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rankin M, Borah GL, Perry AW, Wey PD (1998) Quality-of-life outcomes after cosmetic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 102(6):2139–2145; discussion 2146–2147PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Alsarraf R (2000) Outcomes research in facial plastic surgery: a review and new directions. Aesthetic Plast Surg 24(3):192–197PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Alsarraf R, Larrabee WF Jr, Anderson S, Murakami CS, Johnson CM Jr (2001) Measuring cosmetic facial plastic surgery outcomes: a pilot study. Arch Facial Plast Surg 3(3):198–201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Luce EA (1999) Outcome studies and practice guidelines in plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 104(4): 1187–1190PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sharp HR, Rowe-Jones JM (2003) Assessing outcome in aesthetic rhinoplasty. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 28(5):430–435PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hormozi AK, Toosi AB (2008) Rhinometry: an important clinical index for evaluation of the nose before and after rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 32(2):286–293PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bafaqeeh SA (2000) Open rhinoplasty: effectiveness of different tripplasty techniques to increase nasal tip projection. Am J Otolaryngol 21(4):231–237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rich JS, Friedman WH, Pearlman SJ (1991) The effects of lower lateral cartilage excision on nasal tip projection. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 117(1):56–59PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Vuyk HD, Oakenfull C, Plaat RE (1997) A quantitative appraisal of change in nasal tip projection after open rhinoplasty. Rhinology 35(3):124–128PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Abdoljalil Kalantar-Hormozi
    • 1
  • Arash Beiraghi-Toosi
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Plastic SurgeryShahid Beheshti Medical University (SBMU)TehranIran
  2. 2.Department of Plastic Surgery, Ghaem Hospital, Faculty of Medical SciencesMashhad University of Medical SciencesMashhadIran

Personalised recommendations