ArticleAesthetic surgery journal2025
Thirty-Year Experience in Augmentation Rhinoplasty Using Silicone Implants: A Safer, Cheaper, Faster, and More Effective Technique.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDebate about the advantages and disadvantages of alloplastic vs autologous implant material for dorsal augmentation rhinoplasty continues among the aesthetic surgery community. Silicone implants are criticized for high rates of infection and extrusion; however, autologous methods increase the risk of warping and resorption, and donor-site deformity, which may affect positive outcomes.
objectivesThe aim of this study was to demonstrate that silicone implants are a safe and reliable method of nasal augmentation when performed with proper technique, in an appropriate setting, and by qualified practitioners.
methodsA retrospective chart review was conducted on 1019 patients who underwent implant rhinoplasty from February 1995 to October 2024 by a single surgeon. All procedures were performed in a QuadA-certified operating room under anesthesia by the senior author. I-shaped silicone implants were used for dorsal augmentation.
resultsThe most common complication was due to malposition of the implant (n = 37, 4%), subjective dissatisfaction was the leading reason for revision (n = 43, 4%). Rates of extrusion and infection were low (n = 9, <1%; n = 4, <0.4%).
conclusionsCompared with previously reported results for silicone implant rhinoplasty, this study found that complications can be minimized with proper techniques, such as creating a precise subperiosteal pocket, selecting an appropriate implant length, and minimizing tension at the tip. This risk profile indicates that silicone implant augmentation rhinoplasty is a safe technique and should be considered for its benefits of shorter operation times, cost-effectiveness, and aesthetic outcomes especially in ethnic populations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4:
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.