ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2024
Limited Incision Rhinoplasty: An Approach for All Primary and Revision Cases.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRhinoplasty was one of the most frequently performed aesthetic surgeries in the USA in 2022. Traditionally, the open approach has been preferred by the majority of surgeons often due to familiarity and ease of visualization. However, patient interest in closed and preservation rhinoplasty is driving a resurgence in the popularity of endonasal techniques. We present a series of 100 consecutive endonasal primary and revision rhinoplasty cases using bilateral isolated modified rim incisions.
methodsOne-hundred consecutive patients underwent closed rhinoplasty via isolated modified rim incisions at a single-surgeon private practice. The senior author performs 100% endonasal rhinoplasty. A retrospective chart review was performed from 06/25/20 to 09/21/22. Information on demographics, complications, and need for revision was collected.
resultsEighty-four patients underwent primary rhinoplasty, 11 underwent secondary rhinoplasty, 4 underwent tertiary rhinoplasty, and 1 underwent quaternary rhinoplasty. Isolated modified rim incisions were used in all cases except in cases of septoplasty when a unilateral Killian incision was added, or in cases of lateral osteotomy when vestibular stab incisions were added. Post-operatively, six (6.0%) patients required revision, all of which were performed under local anesthesia.
conclusionLimited incision rhinoplasty is a reliable surgical approach that produces predictable results with a low revision rate. This technique is highly effective in minimizing soft tissue disruption to ensure safe, reliable, and effective outcomes in primary and revision rhinoplasty. It is an easier technique to learn compared to traditional endonasal and even arguably open rhinoplasty, thus lending itself to widespread adoption especially among novice rhinoplasty surgeons. 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 .
Indexed as
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.