Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38234960›Full record

ReviewCureus2023

Non-surgical Rhinoplasty (NSR): A Systematic Review of Its Techniques, Outcomes, and Patient Satisfaction.

Dhuha S Al-Taie, Esraa M AlEdani, Jahnavi Gurramkonda, Shaan Chaudhri, Amina Amin, Binay K Panjiyar, Tuheen Sankar Nath

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Dorsal Augmentation Rhinoplasty by Cartilage Allograft.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Functional, Cosmetic, and Psychological Outcomes after Rhinoplasty.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Dhuha S Al-TaieOtolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Esraa M AlEdaniDermatology and Internal Medicine, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Jahnavi GurramkondaNeurological Surgery, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Shaan ChaudhriPsychiatry, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Amina AminGeneral Surgery, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Binay K PanjiyarInternal Medicine, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences & Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Tuheen Sankar NathSurgical Oncology, Tata Medical Centre, Kolkata, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Surgical rhinoplasty (SR), commonly known as nose job, is a widely practiced cosmetic surgery globally, aimed at addressing diverse aesthetic and functional concerns related to the nose. In recent years, non-surgical rhinoplasty (NSR) has gained popularity due to advanced techniques involving hyaluronic acid (HA) dermal fillers, offering advantages such as affordability, reduced side effects, and faster results. However, concerns persist about the suitability of dermal fillers for nasal anatomy and potential complications, prompting this comprehensive review. This study systematically evaluated the techniques, fillers, safety, and patient satisfaction associated with NSR, with the intent of providing valuable insights for clinicians and patients considering NSR or SR for improved aesthetic outcomes. The literature search, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria, yielded 16 relevant studies from an initial pool of 1002 articles. These studies covered various aspects of NSR, including techniques, complications, limitations, and positive results. In conclusion, NSR appears to be a quick and safe option for addressing minor nose shape issues, particularly through the use of HA fillers, but further discussion and standardization are necessary to address risks and limitations. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) using photographic evidence could significantly propel the progress of this evolving treatment. RCTs offer an optimal method to assess NSR's adverse effects and overall outcomes by allowing controlled comparisons between treatment and control groups. This approach minimizes biases and generates reliable statistical data, which is critical for evaluating safety, efficacy, and potential risks, thereby guiding informed clinical decisions.

Indexed as

cosmetic procedureent proceduresent surgeryfacial cosmetic surgeryfiller around the nosefiller injectionhyaluronic fillersliquid rhinoplastynose jobrhinoplasty surgery

Identifiers

PMID38234960
PMCPMC10792339

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.