Outcomes of Cadaveric Allograft versus Autologous Cartilage Graft in Functional Septorhinoplasty

Outcomes of the Use of Fresh-Frozen Costal Cartilage in Rhinoplasty

BACKGROUND

Rhinoplasty is made more challenging when there is insufficient septal cartilage for use as graft material. Several autologous and homologous graft options have been used in the past, although each comes with its own set of challenges. Fresh-frozen costal cartilage (FFCC) is an increasingly popular alternative that yields the benefits of homologous tissue while having a lower theoretical risk profile. Given the relatively novel nature of this option, the authors analyzed the complication rates of Musculoskeletal Transplant Foundation FFCC.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of the use of FFCC in rhinoplasty in the senior author's (R.G.R.) practice was conducted between March of 2018 to December of 2021. A total of 282 cases were reviewed and analyzed for rates of infection, warping, and resorption. Patients with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up were included.

RESULTS

The mean age of the study group was 35.8 years, and 27 male and 255 female patients were included. Forty cases were primary rhinoplasties; the remaining 242 were revisions. The mean follow-up period was 20.3 months. Six patients (2.1%) required empiric antibiotics postoperatively; no patient had clinical signs of warping, resorption, or displacement, and 6 patients (2.1%) required operative revision unrelated to the FFCC.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides follow-up data on the complication profile of FFCC in rhinoplasty. Acute infection, warping, and resorption rates were found to be no greater than rhinoplasty complication rates when autologous or homologous tissue is used. FFCC is a safe, convenient, and patient-centered option for graft tissue in rhinoplasty.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.

Structural Support for Large to Total Nasal Reconstruction

When large defects of the nose are present, it is imperative to address all 3 layers: the external skin envelope, the osteocartilaginous support, and the inner mucosal lining. The middle structural framework is the primary factor in determining the overall shape of the nose, in addition to facilitating a functional and patent airway. As such, its reconstruction must be robust enough to provide lasting osteocartilaginous support while minimizing disfiguring bulk. The goal is replacement of missing tissue with grafts of similar strength, size, and shape. This article will review approaches to the reconstruction of structural support in large nasal defects.

Complications of Nasal Tip Stabilizing Grafts with Autologous Versus Irradiated Homologous Costal Cartilage in Septorhinoplasty: A Systematic Review

Background: Complications associated with the use of autologous and homologous costal cartilage for nasal tip stabilizing grafts in septorhinoplasty are not well understood. Objective: The authors review current literature to evaluate complications associated with autologous and irradiated homologous costal cartilage (IHCC) used for septal extension and columellar strut grafts in rhinoplasty. Method: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov. Articles that used autologous or IHCC for either septal extension or columellar strut grafts in patients undergoing septorhinoplasty were included. The primary outcomes analyzed were postoperative complications. Results: A total of 14 studies representing 1358 patients were included. The pooled complication rate was 4.7%. IHCC grafts were associated with a higher incidence of complications (n = 21, 5.0% vs. n = 44, 4.6%, p = 0.01). Resorption was the most common complication in the IHCC group and occurred significantly more frequently than in the autologous costal cartilage (ACC) group (n = 10, 2.4% vs. n = 5, 0.49%, p = 0.002). Deviation/warping was the most common complication in the ACC group (n = 16, 1.7%). Conclusion: Autologous and irradiated homologous costal rhinoplasties remain safe procedures. The increased incidence of resorption associated with IHCC grafts should be considered during preoperative planning.

Outcomes of Autologous Versus Irradiated Homologous Costal Cartilage Graft in Rhinoplasty

Background: Autologous costal cartilage (ACC) and irradiated homologous costal cartilage (IHCC) are commonly used in septorhinoplasty when there is insufficient septal cartilage for grafting. Objective: To assess the surgical outcomes of patients who underwent septorhinoplasty with either ACC or IHCC as measured by rates of infection, resorption, warping, and revision rate. Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent rhinoplasty with ACC or IHCC at a single academic institution was performed. Demographic data, surgical details, antibiotic use, and outcomes, including surgical duration, infection, resorption, warping, and revision rate, were analyzed using Fisher's exact test, chi-squared test, and logistic regression. Results: One hundred forty-three patients were identified. The median age was 48 years (interquartile range: 35-57.5) and 62.2% (n = 89) were female, 61 patients (42.7%) underwent ACC, and 82 (57.3%) IHCC. Revision rate in both groups was similar (ACC = 14.8%, IHCC = 14.6%; p = 0.98). There was no difference in infection rate (ACC = 4.9%, IHCC = 3.7%; p = 0.71). Postoperative deformity and nasal obstruction were the most common indications for revision surgery. Surgical time was shorter with IHCC (p < 0.01). Mean follow-up time was 26.5 months (±25) for ACC, and 16 months (±12) for IHCC. Conclusions: ACC and IHCC are similar in terms of effectiveness and safety in septorhinoplasty.

Auricular Framework Construction Using Cadaveric Costal Cartilage in Type III Microtia: Preliminary Results

PURPOSE

Non/minimally irradiated Cadaveric Costal Cartilage (NCCC) is commonly used for grafts in nasal reconstruction; however, no information exists on its use in total ear reconstruction for type III microtia. In this case series we describe preliminary results from the novel use of NCCC for auricular framework construction in 7 ear reconstructions.

METHODS

Patients requiring total ear reconstruction from August 2020 to October 2021 were eligible and underwent ear reconstruction using NCCC from MTF Biologics (Edison, NJ). Patients were evaluated for surgical site infection, skin necrosis, cartilage exposure, warping, and resorption during regular follow up visits.

RESULTS

Seven ears were reconstructed using NCCC across 5 patients with type III microtia. Patients ranged from 5 to 51 years old at the time of surgery. Follow up time ranged from 12 to 78 weeks (mean: 46 wk). No patients experienced surgical site infections or significant cartilage resorption. All procedures were done outpatient, total time under anesthesia was <90 minutes in 5/7 cases and postoperative narcotics for pain management were not needed in 5/7 cases. Complications included minor skin necrosis that was repaired via primary closure, construct exposure in the immediate postoperative period, which was successfully salvaged with a local flap, and explantation of one construct after reconstruction for a complicated revision surgery involving a previous temporoparietal fascial flap.

CONCLUSION

NCCC serves as an immediately available alternative to alloplastic and autologous materials for construction of auricular frameworks during ear reconstruction. Longer follow up times and a larger sample size will further elucidate long-term efficacy.

The Need for Innovation in Rhinoplasty

Rhinoplasty is a challenging surgery and results are not always perfect. There are many obstacles to achieving optimal results. Among these are inadequate instrumentation, the unpredictability of healing, imprecise planning, and many more. Furthermore, selecting patients who can most benefit from surgery is equally important. In this article, some of the more pressing areas of rhinoplasty that need innovation are discussed. From proper patient selection, to advances in education, to the standardization of training programs, to the development of sophisticated implants, the future of rhinoplasty surgery lies in continued creativity and innovation.

The Use of Autologous and Cadaveric Grafts in Rhinoplasty: A Survey Study

BACKGROUND

Both autologous and cadaveric grafts are often used during rhinoplasty to create volume and provide support. Despite discussion in the literature comparing the efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and complication rates between grafting options, it remains unclear which is the superior choice when considering availability, donor site morbidity, and cost. There is a little description of the current use of these materials amongst facial plastic surgeons.

METHODS

A 12 question survey was created, and IRB approval was obtained. The survey was distributed to practicing members of the AAFPRS via their membership listserv.

RESULTS

178 respondents completed the survey for an overall response rate of 17.5%. The most common rhinoplasty graft types used by respondents were autologous septal cartilage (96.6%), autologous auricular grafts (93.8%), autologous rib graft (ARG) (75.8%), and cadaveric rib graft (CRG) (56.7%). Patient comorbidities and performing more than 50 rhinoplasties per year were positively correlated with use of CRG grafts and concerns about complications and cost were negatively correlated.

CONCLUSIONS

While autologous septal and auricular cartilage remain the most common graft choices amongst surveyed facial plastic surgeons, a majority utilize cadaveric rib grafts in their practice. Patient comorbidities, surgery volume, concerns about graft complications, and cost were the chief factors associated with use of cadaveric grafts amongst survey respondents.

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 .

Cost Utility Analysis of Costal Cartilage Autografts and Human Cadaveric Allografts in Rhinoplasty

BACKGROUND

Human cadaveric allograft (HCA) and costal cartilage autograft (CCA) have been described for reconstruction during rhinoplasty. Neither are ideal due to infection, resorption, and donor site morbidity. The clear superiority of 1 graft over the other has not yet been demonstrated. This study assesses comparative costs associated with current grafting materials to better explore the cost ceiling for a theoretical tissue engineered implant.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cost utility analysis was performed. Initial procedure costs include physician fees (CPT 30420), hospital outpatient prospective payments, ambulatory surgical center payments, and fees for the following: rib graft (CPT 20910), hospital observation, and DRG (155) for inpatient admission. Additional costs for revision procedure, included the following fees: physician (CPT 30345), rib graft, hospital outpatient prospective payment, and ambulatory surgical center payments. Total costs under each scenario were calculated with and without the revision procedure. Comparison of total costs for each potential outcome to the estimated health utility value allowed for comparison across rhinoplasty subgroups.

RESULTS

The mean cost of primary outpatient rhinoplasty using HCA and CCA were $8075 and $8342 respectively. Revision outpatient rhinoplasty averaged $7447 and increased to $8228 if costal cartilage harvest was required. Hospital admission increased the cost of primary rhinoplasty with CCA to $8609 for observational admission and to $13653 for 1 day inpatient admission. Revision CCA rhinoplasty with an inpatient admission complicated by pneumothorax increased costs to $21 099.

CONCLUSION

Cost of rhinoplasty without hospitalization was similar between HCA and CCA and this cost represents the lower limit of a practical cost for an engineered graft. Considering complications such as need for revision or for admission after CCA due to surgical morbidity, the upper limit of cost for an engineered implant would approximately double.

Long-Term Outcomes of Inferior Meatus Augmentation Procedure to Treat Empty Nose Syndrome

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

We sought to report the long-term, symptom-focused, prospective outcomes in empty nose syndrome (ENS) patients after undergoing inferior meatus augmentation procedure (IMAP) through use of four validated questionnaires: Empty Nose Syndrome 6-Item Questionnaire (ENS6Q), 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-Item Scale (GAD-7), and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective case series.

METHODS

A single-center prospective case series was performed for patients diagnosed with ENS who underwent IMAP between July 2017 and February 2020. Diagnosis of ENS was based on the following criteria: 1) reported discomfort with nasal breathing and/or paradoxical nasal obstruction after inferior turbinate reduction, 2) a positive ENS6Q score of at least 11, and 3) a positive cotton test. Questionnaire responses were recorded prior to surgery as well as 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

Seventeen eligible patients were included. Mean ENS6Q scores were significantly reduced at all postoperative time points (p < .0001, p < .0001, p < .0001, p = .0003). Of the six ENS6Q subdomains, five (suffocation, dryness, sense of diminished airflow, nasal crusting, and nasal burning) were significantly reduced 1-year postoperatively (p < .0001, p = .0004, p = .0136, p = .0114, p = .0080, respectively). SNOT-22 scores were significantly reduced at all time points (p = .0021, p = .0227, p = .0004, and p = .0025). Of the SNOT-22 subdomains, the sleep subdomain was significantly reduced 1-year postoperatively (p = .0432). Low baseline GAD-7 and PHQ-9 scores were recorded at 7 and 9.4, respectively, and although scores at all postoperative time points were reduced, there was no statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

IMAP via implant of cadaveric rib cartilage provides significant, long-term improvements in ENS-specific and general sinonasal symptoms.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Laryngoscope, 131:E2736-E2741, 2021.

Cadaveric Costal Cartilage Grafts in Rhinoplasty and Septorhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Patient-Reported Functional Outcomes and Complications

ABSTRACT

Irradiated cadaveric costal cartilage (CC) has been utilized as an alternative to autologous cartilage (AC) in functional and aesthetic nasal surgery. The impact of graft choice between AC and CC on functional outcomes in rhinoplasty has yet to be studied. A systematic review was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify comparative studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of CC in nasal surgery. Functional and aesthetic outcomes and complications were reviewed and compared between AC and CC. Meta-analytic comparisons were performed when appropriate using data from comparative studies using a random-effects model. Four studies met inclusion criteria. The indication for surgery was functional in the majority of cases, and 34.6% of cases were revision rhino- or septorhinoplasties. Disparate data across studies prevented meta-analysis on functional outcomes; however, qualitative review of function outcomes demonstrated comparable outcomes between the CC and AC groups. No differences in graft infection, warping, and resorption rates were detected. Analysis of all graft-related complications was higher in the CC group (P = 0.02); however, when AC donor site-related complications were included, no significance between the two groups was observed. In conclusion, limited, high quality data was available for analysis. Of the available studies, this systematic review suggest that the use of AC or CC may lead to comparable results in terms of functional outcomes. More long-term studies directly comparing AC and CC functional outcomes would be welcomed.

Septorhinoplasty and Septoplasty: Outcomes of a Large Cohort Using Autologous Versus Homologous Cartilage, 1999-2019

This study describes the complication rate and use of autologous and/or homologous cartilage in a large 20-year cohort of septo(rhino)plasty surgeries in a Dutch hospital, in relation to postoperative complications of septo(rhino)plasty surgery described in previous studies. A retrospective medical chart review was conducted. 2606 patients, mean age 34.7 (± 13.2) and 59.9% male, underwent primary or revision septo(rhino)plasty surgery from 01/01/1999 to 01/09/2019. Follow-up was known in 1384 of 2606 patients (53.1%) with a mean duration of 47.5 months. Complication registration was complete for 1774 patients. The overall complication rate was 270 out of 1774 (15.2%). The use of autologous costal cartilage (ACC) was a risk factor for overall complication with an odds ratio (OR) of 11.1 (95% CI 0.03-0.30; P < 0.01) as compared to 5.9 (95% CI 0.06-0.45; P < 0.01) when using homologous costal cartilage (HCC). Infections were more likely when ACC (5/26 [19.2%]) was used than when HCC (1/28 [3.6%]) was used. Notable resorption of cartilage was more likely when HCC (9/28 [32.1%]) was used than when ACC (1/26 [3.8%]) was used. Both the use of autologous costal cartilage grafts (OR 11.1) and homologous costal cartilage grafts (OR 5.9) lead to an increased risk of complications. When choosing cartilage type for reconstruction in septo(rhino)plasty, it should be taken into account that both ACC and HCC are associated with a higher risk of complications. 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 .