SynthesisHead & face medicine2025
A comprehensive overview of FFRG and IHCC allograft cartilages in revision rhinoplasty: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Head & face medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rib Grafts in Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Autologous, Fresh-frozen, and Irradiated Cartilage.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Single-stage Septal Framework Reconstruction After Alloplastic Implant Failure Using Autologous Costal Cartilage.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
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
backgroundThis study aims to compare the complications and satisfaction associated with favorable allografts, Fresh Frozen Rib Graft (FFRG) and Irradiated Homologous Costal Cartilage (IHCC), in revision rhinoplasty.
methodsThe PRISMA guidelines were adhered to in the conduct of this systematic review. No limitations were applied to the types of studies included. Studies in English were selected without any time limitations. Five databases, PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Library, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and also, the reference lists of included studies were searched. The ROBINS-I was employed for risk of bias assessment. Patients who underwent revision rhinoplasty utilizing allografts (FFRG and IHCC) were considered.
resultsThe initial search yielded a total of 503 studies. After duplicate removal and paper screening, 7 studies were included. A total of 406 patients for FFRG and 66 patients for IHCC who underwent revision rhinoplasty with the use of FFRG and IHCC were incorporated. Various complications were assessed, including warping, infective/noninfective resorption, infection, extrusion/displacement, and other less common occurrences. The overall complication rates were 9.25% and 15.7% for FFRG and IHCC, respectively. The main complication associated with the two was infection. Notably, both FFRG and IHCC demonstrated significant improvements in patient satisfaction following revision surgery across all subjected studies.
conclusionBased on this review, FFRGs present a lower rate of complications in comparison with IHCCs. However, the biocompatibility makes the autologous rib cartilage the gold standard graft, but in case of donor site limitations to harvesting, FFRG and IHCC would be a safe and reliable alternative.
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.