Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A Modified Large-Cap Graft in East Asian Revision Rhinoplasty

  • Original Article
  • Rhinoplasty
  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Reconstructing a well-defined nasal tip is a big challenge for East Asian patients, especially with nasal tip irregularities or short noses in revision rhinoplasty. This study aims to report our experience with a modified large-cap graft for improving the contour of the nasal tip in revision rhinoplasty.

Methods

A retrospective review was conducted for 91 patients (81 females, 10 males; mean age, 26.8 ± 6.7 years) who underwent revision rhinoplasty with a modified large-cap graft. The rhinoplasty outcome evaluation (ROE) was used for investigating patient satisfaction. The aesthetic outcomes were assessed by preoperative and postoperative photographs by two blinded plastic surgeons using the Independent Rhinoplasty Outcome Score.

Results

Most patients reported satisfactory aesthetic outcomes with overall ROE score increasing from preoperative 11.66 ± 3.98 to postoperative 17.30 ± 5.03 (p < 0.001). The doctors’ evaluations on the improved contour of the nose rendered an overall score of 3.77 ± 0.42. The complication rate was 3.3% (pleural tear, 1.1%; hypertrophic scar, 2.2%) at the donor site, and 7.7% at the recipient site (warping, 3.3%; extrusion, 1.1%; deviation, 2.2%; infection, 1.1%). No other complications were observed during follow-up.

Conclusions

Large-cap graft may be safe and efficient for reconstructing contour of the nasal tip in revision rhinoplasty for East Asian patients.

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.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Park JH, Jin HR (2012) Use of autologous costal cartilage in Asian rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 130(6):1338–1348

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Rosenberger ES, Toriumi DM (2016) Controversies in revision rhinoplasty. Fac Plast Surg Clin North Am 24(3):337–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Jang YJ, Kim DY (2016) Treatment strategy for revision rhinoplasty in Asians. Fac Plast Surg 32(6):615–619

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Sajjadian A, Rubinstein R, Naghshineh N (2010) Current status of grafts and implants in rhinoplasty: part I Autologous grafts. Plast Reconstr Surg 125(2):40e–49e

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Liang X, Wang K, Malay S, Chung KC, Ma J (2018) A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparison between autologous costal cartilage and alloplastic materials in rhinoplasty. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 71(8):1164–1173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Farrior EH, Ballert JA (2012) Nuances of the nasal tip: rhinoplasty of the thin-skinned nose. Facial Plast Surg 28(2):171–176

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Lee M, Inman J, Ducic Y (2011) Central segment harvest of costal cartilage in rhinoplasty. Laryngoscope 121(10):2155–2158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Anantanarayanan P, Raja DK, Kumar JN, Sneha P, Christabel A, Manikandhan R et al (2013) Catheter-based donor site analgesia after rib grafting: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded clinical trial comparing ropivacaine and bupivacaine. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 71(1):29–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Woo KJ, Kang BY, Min JJ, Park JW, Kim A, Oh KS (2016) Postoperative pain control by preventive intercostal nerve block under direct vision followed by catheter-based infusion of local analgesics in rib cartilage harvest for auricular reconstruction in children with microtia: a randomized controlled trial. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 69(9):1203–1210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. JR A (1969) The dynamics of rhinoplasty. In: Proceedings of the Nineth international congress of otolaryngology. Excerpta medica international congress series, No 206. Excerpta Medica, Amsterdam, Netherlands, pp 708-710

  11. Sciegienka S, Hanick A, Spataro E (2022) Nasal tip support and management of the tip tripod complex. Clin Plast Surg 49(1):61–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Foda HM (2003) Management of the droopy tip: a comparison of three alar cartilage-modifying techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg 112(5):1408–1417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Fakhro A, Wagner RD, Kim YK, Nguyen AH (2015) Milestones of Asian rhinoplasty. Semin Plast Surg 29(4):213–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Tebbetts JB (1994) Shaping and positioning the nasal tip without structural disruption: a new, systematic approach. Plast Reconstr Surg 94(1):61–77

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Mohan R, Shanmuga Krishnan RR, Rohrich RJ (2019) Role of fresh frozen cartilage in revision rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 144(3):614–622

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Tian L, You J, Wang H, Zhang B, Xu Y, Lu X et al (2017) Comparison of two different grafts in nasal framework reconstruction of binder syndrome: cartilage and silicone. J Craniofac Surg 28(6):1413–1417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gunter JP, Clark CP, Friedman RM (1997) Internal stabilization of autogenous rib cartilage grafts in rhinoplasty: a barrier to cartilage warping. Plast Reconstr Surg 100(1):161–169

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Adams WP Jr, Rohrich RJ, Gunter JP, Clark CP, Robinson JB Jr (1999) The rate of warping in irradiated and nonirradiated homograft rib cartilage: a controlled comparison and clinical implications. Plast Reconstr Surg 103(1):265–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kridel RW, Scott BA, Foda HM (1999) The tongue-in-groove technique in septorhinoplasty: a 10-year experience. Arch Fac Plast Surg 1(4):246–256

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Sajjadian A, Guyuron B (2009) An algorithm for treatment of the drooping nose. Aesthet Surg J 29(3):199–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Patrocinio LG, Patrocinio TG, Barreto DM, Subhan YS, Patrocinio JA (2014) Evaluation of lateral crural steal in nasal tip surgery. JAMA Fac Plast Surg 16(6):400–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Karaiskakis P, Bromba M, Dietz A, Sand M, Dacho A (2016) Reconstruction of nasal tip support in primary, open approach septorhinoplasty: a retrospective analysis between the tongue-in-groove technique and the columellar strut. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 273(9):2555–2560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Dobratz EJ, Tran V, Hilger PA (2010) Comparison of techniques used to support the nasal tip and their long-term effects on tip position. Arch Fac Plast Surg 12(3):172–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Byrd HS, Andochick S, Copit S, Walton KG (1997) Septal extension grafts: a method of controlling tip projection shape. Plast Reconstr Surg 100(4):999–1010

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Rohrich RJ, Deuber MA (2002) Nasal tip refinement in primary rhinoplasty: the cephalic trim cap graft. Aesthet Surg J 22(1):39–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Toriumi DM, Checcone MA (2009) New concepts in nasal tip contouring. Fac Plast Surg Clin North Am 17(1):55–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Bussi M, Palonta F, Toma S (2013) Grafting in revision rhinoplasty. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 33(3):183–189

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Miranda N, Larocca CG, Aponte C (2013) Rhinoplasty using autologous costal cartilage. Facial Plast Surg 29(3):184–192

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Gibson T (1965) Cartilage Grafts. Br Med Bull 21:153–156

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Varadharajan K, Sethukumar P, Anwar M, Patel K (2015) Complications associated with the use of autologous costal cartilage in rhinoplasty: a systematic review. Aesthet Surg J 35(6):644–652

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the patients for providing consent for the publication of these cases.

Funding

No funding was received for this article.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Ruobing Zheng and Wenfang Dong have contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Twelfth Department of Plastic Surgery, Plastic Surgery Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 33 Badachu Road, Shijingshan District, Beijing, 100144, China

    Ruobing Zheng, Wenfang Dong, Yihao Xu & Fei Fan

  2. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, No.1838 North Guangzhou Avenue, Baiyun District, Guangzhou, 510515, China

    Ri Han

Authors
  1. Ruobing Zheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wenfang Dong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ri Han
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yihao Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Fei Fan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

RZ and WD are responsible for the design of the study, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation of data, and drafting the manuscript. YX and RH participated in the discussion and revision of the manuscript. RZ and FF performed the surgical procedures. FF is responsible for designing the study, revising the manuscript, and final approval of the version to be published.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fei Fan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving the human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all patients.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zheng, R., Dong, W., Han, R. et al. A Modified Large-Cap Graft in East Asian Revision Rhinoplasty. Aesth Plast Surg 46, 2378–2386 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-022-02912-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-022-02912-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation