ArticleAesthetic surgery journal. Open forum2021
Autologous Fat Injection for Augmentation Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of Personalized 3D-Printed Silicone Implants in Rhinoplasty: An Animal Experimental Study.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Dorsal Augmentation Rhinoplasty by Cartilage Allograft.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Article
- Nasal Reshaping Using Barbed Threads Combined With Hyaluronic Acid Filler and Botulinum Toxin A.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Article
- Lipoinjection with Adipose Stem Cells for Nasal Modeling: Rhino Cell, a Highly Versatile Alternative.Archives of plastic surgery · 2023Article
- Prevalence of complications associated with polymer-based alloplastic materials in nasal dorsal augmentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Maxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2022Review
- Ethnicity and Nonsurgical Rhinoplasty.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAutologous fat has become more frequently used for nasal volume augmentation and nasal correction. Nasal lipofilling refers to the use of injectable autologous fat grafts for nonsurgical aesthetic corrections.
objectivesThis systematic review aims to assess the satisfaction, complication, and retention rates of fat injection in nasal shape corrections.
methodsThe authors searched PubMed/Medline and Google Scholar up to and including October 2020 with no time and language restrictions for pertinent materials. Two authors conducted a duplicate searching process independently to determine proper materials based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. One author retrieved the following data from the finally included studies based on a predefined checklist worksheet.
resultsThe included studies report data from a total of 564 patients undergoing nasal fat injection in 12 studies. The mean score in our included materials was 6.08 with a range of 4 to 7 scores. In most of our included materials, no complication was reported for the peri/postsurgical period. Although some papers reported manageable complications such as an insufficient volume or decreased volume by resorption, tip excess and supratip fillness, and mild displacement, more than half of our included materials reported on patient satisfaction with aesthetic results of fat injection. The satisfaction rates were mostly high and ranged from 63% to 100%.
conclusionsAutologous fat injection is an effective and minimally invasive treatment for nasal aesthetic and contour correction with a high satisfaction rate and low complication rate. Clinical expertise is essential to have a safe injection and to minimize the potential complications. 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.