[Comparison of piezoelectric and conventional osteotomy in rhinoplasty : A systematic review]

Combining Piezo and Power Tools for a Better Outcome in Hybrid Structural-Preservation Rhinoplasty

INTRODUCTION

Over the past decade, rhinoplasty has seen an unprecedented evolution in concepts, techniques and tools. New concepts have led to new techniques, prevalently but not exclusively related to preservation rhinoplasty, and the use of new tools has made such techniques easier, more precise and thus better reproducible. Power tools can presently be considered only relatively new, while Piezo has gained great popularity over the last years.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

This article is focused on how power tools (diverse burrs with specific spherical, cylindrical, conical, discoid tips) can be integrated efficiently together with the use of Piezo and its different inserts in a logical and effective manner.

DISCUSSION

This combination should be implemented in a progressive fashion into specific steps of surgery, although, in general, burrs should be used for reshaping and piezo for cutting bone. Specific and notable exceptions to this rule will be mentioned in the paper. Obviously, cost should be considered, but the benefits are evident: heightened control, reduced asymmetries, smoother bony and middle vault contour, and a more precise management of septum and turbinates. We have come to this conclusion following the combined experience of the two centers participating in the study, with over 350 patients over the last three years.

CONCLUSIONS

The article focuses on the modified dorsal split preservation hybrid rhinoplasty favored by the senior author, but its principles will easily apply to any structural, preservation, or hybrid rhinoplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V

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 .

Closed Piezo Preservation Rhinoplasty

BACKGROUND

The application of piezoelectric instruments (PEIs), which made the work with the nasal pyramid a predictable and controlled stage of rhinoplasty, is still more often related to the open approach. The intranasal approach is constantly associated with standard methods of osteotomies, including percutaneous techniques, which represent certain limitations in working with the bony vault without managing the surface and thickness of its walls and the risk of uncontrolled fractures.

OBJECTIVES

The authors apply PEIs for osteotomies and reshaping of the nasal pyramid through the closed approach with preservation rhinoplasty and complete subperichondrial and subperiosteal dissection.

METHODS

The technique of working with the nasal pyramid using PEIs with the closed approach is described. The patients were grouped according to the methods of nasal pyramid surgery-Push Down (PD), Let Down (LD) with Rhinosculpture (Rs), or the combinations. The results of the surgeries with the application of PEIs on 134 patients were retrospectively analyzed before the surgery and 12 months after it according to the "Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation" (ROE).

RESULTS

The average age of the patients was 28, 125 were female and 9 were male. The patients' satisfaction was excellent in 96% of all the cases included. There were two cases with residual humps and four cases with residual asymmetries in cases of severe deviations.

CONCLUSIONS

Via intranasal approach, it is possible to use PEIs for managing the bony vault in primary rhinoplasty. The limitations for this technique are underdevelopment of the nasal dorsum, cleft lip nose situations, post-traumatic and previous rhinoplasty cases.

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 .

Piezo-Assisted Dorsal Preservation in Rhinoplasty: When and Why

BACKGROUND

Preservation rhinoplasty philosophy with its "down techniques" is currently undergoing a renaissance. Its goal is to spare and preserve noble nasal structures such as ligaments, nerves and vessels, reducing to a minimum local tissue manipulation and avoiding the drawbacks and pitfalls associated with classic dorsal reconstruction techniques often resulting in irregularities which often lead to an increased rhinoplasty revision rate.

METHODS

In this article, we reviewed 107 consecutive cases in which a variety of preservation techniques were used. Indications, surgical techniques and complications are also described.

RESULTS

All reported procedures showed low complication rates with good cosmetic and functional outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Tailoring the surgical technique is essential in rhinoplasty. Authors have developed and present an anatomy-based diagram to help surgeons in choosing the right approach for dorsal surgery.

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 Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

[Advantages of piezoelectric technology in rhinoplasty]

BACKGROUND

Facial plastic and reconstructive surgery requires delicate, atraumatic handling of cartilage, bone and the surrounding soft tissue. Piezoelectric instrumentation (PEI) has previously been shown to be a precise and safe surgical instrument in rhinoplasty. It offers good preservation of surrounding soft tissue and high cutting precision and thus a good surgical applicability in rhinoplasty.

OBJECTIVE

This article presents experiences using PEI for cartilage preparation and modelling for various indications in facial plastic surgery. The use of PEI in rhinoplasty, its safety and preciseness were evaluated and postoperative results are discussed with respect to facial swelling and bruising.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 35 patients undergoing rhinoplasty and follow-up. Surgery was conducted by two expert surgeons in rhinoplasty in the department of otorhinolaryngology at the University Clinic of LMU Munich. Surgical performance of PEI in comparison with conventional instruments was evaluated by a customized questionnaire. The postoperative assessment of pain, facial swelling and bruising was documented.

RESULTS

This article presents the different options for the use of PEI in rhinoplasty. In bone modelling procedures, such as hump removal, osteotomy and bony fixations, PEI was evaluated as being superior to conventional instruments. Intraoperative bleeding was reduced, which led to reduced facial swelling and/or bruising. Postoperative pain assessment showed no or only mild pain in two thirds of the patients.

CONCLUSION

The results show that PEI enables a safe and very precise operation. Further development of surgical inserts will enable new surgical steps and facilitate the handling.