Rhinoplasty Surgery News
Revision Plastic Surgery to Correct Asymmetric Nasal Tips,
Breathing Obstructions in High Demand
As reported in the Sept/Oct issue of Archives of Facial Plastic
Surgery, patients who seek a secondary surgery to revise
their rhinoplasty often because they are dissatisfied with
the symmetry of the tip of their nose or because of nasal obstructions.
About 5 to 15 percent of patients who have a rhinoplasty inquire
about a revision, according to the article.
Kathy Yu, M.D., of Columbia College and Cornell University
in New York, and colleagues accumulated feedback from 104 patients
seeking revision surgery between Jan. 1, 2008, and June 30, 2009.
Most patients reported seeking a revision because of nasal tip
asymmetry, nasal obstruction, or a crooked middle of the nose.
By Kathy Jones @ MedIndia on September 21, 2010
Rhinoplasty patients who previewed their new nose before surgery
were happiest with results
A new study in the Nov/Dec issue of the Archives of Facial
Plastic Surgery discovered that computer imaging software
provides patients with a reliable proposal of how they may
look after a rhinoplasty and most people value the innovative
preview process. Surgeons included in the study said that cosmetic
surgeons have used the software since the 90's and it appears
to improve communication between the patient and doctor. They
also stated that possessing a picture of a patient in front
of them and manipulating the nose on the computer screen is
superior to the patient presenting pictures of a dozen other
people's noses they like since it's their face and their nose.
The study found that patients who considered their computer
picture to be accurate were inclined to be more content about
their results, while surgeons were less likely to assume the
image perfectly foretold the surgery's outcome.
By Jenifer Goodwin @ HealthDay on November 19, 2010
Minimally Invasive Technique Relieves Nasal Obstruction
According to a study led by Jay M. Dutton, MD , an otolaryngologist
at Rush, Z-plasty, a minimally invasive surgical procedure to
remedy collapse of the internal nasal valve, revealed considerable
improvement in alleviate obstruction with minimal recovery time
compared to traditional open rhinoplasty surgery. The results
were published in the May issue of Archives of Facial Plastic
Surgery.
Internal nasal valve collapse is one of the most
common situations that tend to lead to nasal valve surgery. The
traditional surgical approach, rhinoplasty, repairs the difficulty
but can change the appearance of the nose. Z-plasty, on the other
hand, most often used by surgeons for revision of scars, is done
completely from the inside.
Over a 24-month period, 12 patients
underwent the Z-plasty procedure, most of whom had been treated
with prior therapies that were not effective. They were asked
to evaluate their nasal obstruction on a scale of 0 to 10,
zero being perfect airflow and 10 being total obstruction, before
and after the procedure. All but one patient noted major improvement
in airflow in both nostrils, and none of them complained about
the appearance of their noses after the procedure.
From Rush Physician Newsletter, Rush University Medical
Center on July 2008
The Treatment of Nasal Fractures - A Changing Paradigm
Study examines treatment and outcomes for nasal fractures
Both modestly invasive and conventional open methods can effectively
restore nasal fractures, if the procedure is coordinated to the
individual fracture, according to an article in the Sept/Oct
edition of Archives of Facial Plastic Surgery, a JAMA/Archive
journal. A treatment sequence based on aspects such as degree
of deviation of the septum and fracture type can assist surgeons
to choose the proper treatment. Despite the commonality of nasal
fractures, treatment of these injuries is still controversial
with surgeons, according to the article. Some advocate no intervention,
and others support extensive surgery using rhinoplasty procedures.
Treatment is typically divided into minimally invasive repair
by closed reduction and open reduction techniques. "Closed
reduction is a relatively simple procedure, at times producing
acceptable outcomes," the authors write. "However,
advocates of open reduction purport better cosmetic results and
a high likelihood that closed reductions will eventually need
a second operation using an open reduction technique."
Deciding which method to use for a particular nasal fracture
can be difficult. Not all fractures can be treated using closed
techniques and, equally, not all fractures necessitate the expense
and time of an open reduction. Michael P. Ondik, M.D., and colleagues
at Penn State Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pa., did a study
of 86 patients who were treated for nasal fractures at the facility
between 1997 and 2007. Forty-one had closed treatments and forty-five
had open treatments. Fractures were categorized as one of 5 types.
Modification rates were calculated for each group, and then preoperative
and postoperative photographs were rated. Patients were interviewed
regarding functional, aesthetic, and quality of life matters.
The rate of revisions for all fractures was about 6 percent,
which included 2 percent for closed procedures and 9 percent
for open ones. Many closed procedure instances were categorized
as type II fractures, or simple fractures that included deviation
of the septum, while the majority of the open treatment situations
were categorized as type IV fractures, more severely deviated
septal and nasal fractures.
Successful treatment algorithms should offer each patient with
a pleasing appearance and a superior functioning restoration,
leaving the more invasive procedures for those patients who really
need it and allocating simple fractures to be handled more conservatively.
Their findings confirmed this approach and successfully balanced
the results between the open and closed procedure groups.
Published: Monday, September 21, 2009 - 16:43 in Health & Medicine |
