Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39258281›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2024

Hump Rasping Using Powered Instruments: A Retrospective Review.

Badi F Aldosari, Rafeef I Alhajress, Ahmad O Bogari

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07142525 (Aesthetic and Functional Outcomes Following Hybrid Osteoplasty Versus Traditional Osteotomy in Rhinoplasty), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.

NCT07142525 naactive not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Aesthetic and Functional Outcomes Following Hybrid Osteoplasty Versus Traditional Osteotomy in Rhinoplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of SulaimaniRan2025 to 2026Enrolled200ConditionsRhinoplasty TechniquesArmsHybrid Osteoplasty, Traditional Osteotomy and Rasping
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Badi F AldosariFrom the Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, King Abdulaziz University Hospital, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Rafeef I AlhajressFrom the Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, King Abdulaziz University Hospital, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Ahmad O BogariFrom the Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, King Abdulaziz University Hospital, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Nasal hump reduction, a common procedure in rhinoplasty, aims to create a harmonious nasal appearance with smooth dorsal lines. An alternative to traditional osteotomes is the carbide-tip nasal rasp, effective in eliminating modest contour deformities. However, the broad movements and physical forces of manual rasping can significantly weaken the osseocartilaginous vault. Power-assisted instruments have been used to reduce soft tissue trauma. Although long-term clinical outcomes of power-assisted instrumentation are pending, initial reports have been positive. Methods: This retrospective chart review encompassed 220 consecutive rhinoplasty cases conducted by the senior author, all involving women aged 19-37 years. Excluding 80 cases that did not involve bone reduction, the analysis concentrated on 140 patients who underwent bone reduction procedures. The success of nasal hump reduction was evaluated based on the joint satisfaction of both the patient and the surgeon with the surgical improvement. Results: The open rhinoplasty approach was predominantly used for surgical exposure to minimize inadvertent rasping of the nasal cartilage. Among the 140 patients undergoing power-assisted bone removal, all but five achieved an initially satisfactory refinement of the bony nasal contour. Notably, no serious complications were observed throughout the study. Unfortunately, one patient did not comply with the monthly steroid injections, leading to the necessity of revision surgery for the removal of regenerated bone. Conclusion: The integration of power-assisted instrumentation in rhinoplasty procedures represents a promising advancement, addressing challenges associated with traditional methods.

Identifiers

PMID39258281
PMCPMC11387045

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.