ArticleAesthetic surgery journal. Open forum2020
Classification and Treatment of Glabella-Radix Deficiency in Primary Augmentation Rhinoplasty.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The usefulness of patient-specific 3D nasal silicone implant using 3D design and order form.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA systematic approach to treating glabella-radix deficiency is lacking, and the management of brow-tip aesthetic lines remains technically challenging.
objectivesThe authors describe implantation of a customized Gore-Tex prosthesis combined with primary augmentation rhinoplasty to address the glabella-radix deficiency.
methodsFifty Asian patients with glabella-radix deficiency who received implantation and primary augmentation rhinoplasty were retrospectively evaluated in an 8-year period. Patients were assigned to categories based on brow-tip contour lines and symmetry patterns, and implant dimensions were ascertained from the contour type and from simulated postoperative results.
resultsEleven men and 39 women were included in the study; the mean patient age was 27.22 years, and mean follow-up was 22.8 months. Seven of the patients were assigned to the type I/Ia category, 24 to type II/IIa, and 19 to type III/IIIa. Forty-five patients were considered to have satisfactory surgical results, with curved, symmetric, and normally spaced brow-tip lines on front view and a smooth frontonasal transition on profile view. Complications occurred in 5 patients and included infection (1 patient), inadequate augmentation (2), and palpable margin folding of the Gore-Tex device (2).
conclusionsDeformities of brow-tip contour lines coincide with glabella-radix deficiencies in terms of severity. Knowledge of the patterns of brow-tip lines, combined with postoperative image simulation, can help the surgeon design an appropriate glabella-radix prosthesis. When placed in conjunction with other augmentation rhinoplasty procedures, the glabella-radix implant yields sufficient, predictable nasal projection and a harmonious facial aesthetic. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 4:
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.