Rhinoplasty and External Nasal Splinting: Is It Really a Must?

Optimizing Postoperative Care in Rhinoplasty and Septoplasty: A Review of the Role of Nasal Packing and Alternatives in Complication Management

Rhinoplasty, a common surgical procedure for nose reshaping, demands meticulous preoperative evaluation and precise execution. When coupled with septoplasty to address medical issues stemming from a deviated nasal septum, these procedures can lead to noteworthy postoperative complications. These encompass early issues like epistaxis and hematoma, as well as long-term challenges such as scarring and aesthetic deformities. Strategies like steroids and tranexamic acid are employed to prevent and manage these complications. A contentious aspect in postoperative care is the use of nasal packing. While some argue it aids healing and hemostasis, others avoid it due to patient discomfort. This review assesses the pros and cons of postoperative nasal packing following rhinoplasty and septoplasty. A thorough literature review spanning 2000-2023 yielded 30 relevant articles from 62. Discussion reveals that nasal packing offers limited benefits in reducing bleeding, edema and ecchymosis. In conclusion, the decision to employ nasal packing in rhinoplasty and septoplasty should be made carefully, considering patient comfort and surgical context. Evidence suggests that nasal packing may not consistently provide significant advantages and could lead to adverse outcomes. Nasal splints offer similar advantages and may be considered viable alternatives. Surgeons should tailor their approach to individual patient needs, with further research needed to refine postoperative management for these procedures.Level of Evidence III 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 .

Autospreader Flaps in Closed Rhinoplasty: Our Technique and Long-Term Results

INTRODUCTION

 Rhinoplasty is a common and complex surgical procedure. Respiratory and aesthetic dissatisfaction are major causes of revision surgeries. Multiple techniques were described to reconstruct the middle nasal vault and improve functional outcomes. One of these techniques is the use of autospreader flaps. These flaps were constantly modified by different surgeons. In our practice, we use a modified technique of autospreader flaps in closed rhinoplasty. Neither upper lateral cartilage scoring nor suture fixation to the septum was done.

METHODS

 We conducted a retrospective study on 183 patients, analyzing revision rates and long-term functional results using the NOSE scale. Data analysis was done using IBM Corp. Released 2019. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.

RESULTS

 Long-term results showed satisfactory aesthetic outcomes with low revision rates (13.6%). Concerning the NOSE score, it was completed by 87 of the 183 patients, yielding a response rate of 47.5%. A mean NOSE score of 18.1 +/- 21.1 at 4.4 years of follow-up was obtained.

CONCLUSION

 Autospreader flaps offer simplicity, reproducibility, and effectiveness in closed rhinoplasty. It represents a valuable option for selected patients, especially in populations with high dorsal reduction surgery demand.

Intravenous catheter flanges as an external nasal stent: a novel technique

External nasal splints are commonly used for immobilization following nasal fracture reduction or rhinoplasty procedures. The literature documents the use of various materials like thermoplastic materials, aluminum, Orthoplast, fiberglass, plaster of Paris, and polyvinyl siloxane. These materials are bulky, time-consuming, expensive, and cumbersome to use, and have been associated with complications including contact dermatitis and epidermolysis. Furthermore, they cannot be retained if the situation warrants prolonged stabilization and immobilization. We introduce a new technique using readily available scalp vein catheter flanges as an external nasal stent. The technique is easy to master, inexpensive, and limits edema and ecchymosis, while stabilizing the reconstructed nasal skeleton in position during the healing period.

Role of External Nasal Splinting Following Rhinoplasty: Is It Really Important? A Comprehensive Systematic Review of Literature

BACKGROUND

Following rhinoplasty, external nasal splints are used to reshape the cartilage and reposition the nasal bone. Despite the popularity of using an external nasal splint in rhinoplasty procedures, there is still a lack of evidence of the effectiveness of using the external nasal splint post-rhinoplasty. This systematic literature review aimed to evaluate the evidence regarding the use of external nasal splints following rhinoplasty.

METHODS

A systematic search of Cochrane, Medline, and Embase databases was conducted in September 2022. The literature was screened independently by two reviewers, and the data were extracted. Our search terms included septorhinoplasty, rhinoplasty, osteotomy, splinting, nasal splinting, and external nasal splinting.

RESULTS

Initially, 1617 articles were identified, but only four articles were included in the final review. The included studies were all published between 2016 and 2021. The included studies recruited 2425 patients, 20 of whom used external splints and 2415 did not. Out of 2415 patients who did not use an external nasal splint, there were 151 patients with moderate periorbital edema and ecchymosis. There was a decrease in nasal width in 99% of the patients who did not use external nasal splinting postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

According to our findings, nasal splinting should not be routinely used following rhinoplasty, but only in certain patients. There is no clear evidence that nasal splints reduce complications, and complications occurred among both patients with and without external nasal splints. Further studies need to be conducted to confirm this conclusion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

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 .

The Use of Postoperative Compression Garments in Plastic Surgery-Necessary or Not? A Practical Review

This practical review critically evaluates the evidence behind the widespread use of postoperative compression therapy intended to improve surgical outcomes, such as reduced edema, ecchymosis, pain, and seroma formation. A literature search of PubMed was conducted to identify relevant studies concerning the use of compression garments after aesthetic surgery, including rhinoplasty, facelift, neck lift, mammoplasty, abdominoplasty, limb contouring, and others. Additionally, reconstructive and therapeutic procedures closely related in anatomy or technique to these cosmetic operations, such as breast reconstruction, mastectomy, and hernia repair, were also considered to provide further perspective. After study extraction, the volume, quality, and agreement of the evidence found was highly heterogenous depending on the context of specific operations and outcomes evaluated. The most well-supported indications for the use of postoperative compression garments are to mitigate edema and ecchymosis after rhinoplasty and to reduce postoperative pain after breast and abdominal procedures, although no effect on seroma rate was demonstrated. Any potential benefit must be balanced against the associated costs and possible complications of compression, including patient discomfort, increased venous stasis, and skin defects. Thus, we encourage surgeons to critically reassess their use of compression garments. In many settings, such as brachioplasty, there is limited high-quality evidence to inform best practice, and we urge the community to continue researching this important topic so that more definitive and comprehensive guidelines may be established.

Our experience with lipofilling in secondary rhinoplasty, into a new era

Rhinoplasty is a commonly performed cosmetic surgery. Clinicians are facing an increased demand on non-surgical procedures, therefore liquid rhinoplasty is gaining popularity. Given the characteristic of lipofilling to rejuvenate and improve skin texture, fat grafting can be used to reshape the nose in secondary rhinoplasty. Fat was injected in 27 patients with a mean age of 42 years. Volume of fat ranged from 1.5 to 4.5 cc with a mean of 2.2 cc. Patients were seen at 1 week, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year. Patient satisfaction was measured using the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation questionnaire and plastic surgeons' evaluation. After 1 year follow up, 20 patients were satisfied with the results at 1 year. The aesthetic outcome was noted as very good in 11 patients, good in 9 patients, and poor in 3 patients. Most of the patients had an improvement in skin texture with trophic effect on the skin. No complications were seen in our series According to this study, nasal lipofilling is a safe and efficacious filler in secondary rhinoplasty. However, more studies are needed to assess the indications and limitations of nose lipofilling.

External Splinting Is Not Mandatory After All Rhinoplasties: A Prospective Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Although casts or external splint materials are commonly applied on the external nose after rhinoplasty, their beneficial effects have not been previously demonstrated in controlled studies.

METHODS

A total of 40 adult patients who underwent primary rhinoplasty were included in this prospective study. The patients were randomized into 2 groups to use an external splint or not after surgery. Only surgical taping was applied to the nasal dorsum of the patients for whom external splints were not used. The periorbital edema and ecchymosis levels of the patients were recorded on the second and seventh days after surgery. Moreover, all patients had a computed tomography scan at the third postoperative week to measure the distance between the beginning of the osteotomy line on the right and left sides and the midline.

RESULTS

On the second and seventh postoperative days, the levels of periorbital edema and ecchymosis were significantly lower in the patients with taping than in the patients with splints (P < 0.05 for each). No statistically significant difference was observed in terms of the difference in the distance between the beginning of the osteotomy line on the right and left sides to the midline between the group with external splints and that with tape (P = 0.661).

CONCLUSIONS

External splinting may not be used in cases where osteotomy is not performed or in patients where the osteotomies are sufficiently stable. Thus, the disadvantages of external splinting are avoided, and at the same time, periorbital edema and ecchymosis are less common.