Dorsal Preservation versus Open Structural Rhinoplasty: Can We Tell the Difference between Aesthetic and Functional Outcomes?
Preservation-with respect to the dorsum, nasal cartilages, and soft-tissue envelope-has reemerged as a guiding philosophy in rhinoplasty. Dorsal preservation (DP) is attractive for its advantages of maintaining the osseocartilaginous construct and avoiding an open-roof deformity. Several studies hav...
Saved in:
Published in | Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963) Vol. 156; no. 3; p. 385 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
United States
01.09.2025
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get more information |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Preservation-with respect to the dorsum, nasal cartilages, and soft-tissue envelope-has reemerged as a guiding philosophy in rhinoplasty. Dorsal preservation (DP) is attractive for its advantages of maintaining the osseocartilaginous construct and avoiding an open-roof deformity. Several studies have suggested comparable outcomes of DP relative to structural rhinoplasty, but how aesthetic, functional, and patient-reported outcome measures may compare, and whether surgeons can discern differences between cohorts, remains unclear.
A retrospective review was performed of patients undergoing DP and structural rhinoplasty. Preoperative and 1-year postoperative photographs were taken. Patients were classified into 2 cohorts: DP or non-DP (NDP). There were 3 types of raters: the general population, plastic surgeons, and rhinoplasty surgeons. Patients were also asked to fill out questionnaires, including the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation and the Standardized Cosmesis and Health Nasal Outcomes Survey.
A total of 78 participants were included within the analysis. Overall, the evaluators correctly identified the surgical approach 52.9% of the time. Rhinoplasty surgeons demonstrated the least interrater variability when compared with the general population and plastic surgeons. Overall mean obstruction composite scores from the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation and Standardized Cosmesis and Health Nasal Outcomes Survey questionnaire were comparable between DP and NDP cohorts.
Across evaluators, there were comparable functional, aesthetic, and patient-reported outcomes between DP and NDP cohorts. Given its key advantage of ensuring the stability of the osseocartilaginous framework, DP should be performed for appropriate patients given its favorable aesthetic and functional outcomes.
Therapeutic, III. |
---|---|
AbstractList | Preservation-with respect to the dorsum, nasal cartilages, and soft-tissue envelope-has reemerged as a guiding philosophy in rhinoplasty. Dorsal preservation (DP) is attractive for its advantages of maintaining the osseocartilaginous construct and avoiding an open-roof deformity. Several studies have suggested comparable outcomes of DP relative to structural rhinoplasty, but how aesthetic, functional, and patient-reported outcome measures may compare, and whether surgeons can discern differences between cohorts, remains unclear.
A retrospective review was performed of patients undergoing DP and structural rhinoplasty. Preoperative and 1-year postoperative photographs were taken. Patients were classified into 2 cohorts: DP or non-DP (NDP). There were 3 types of raters: the general population, plastic surgeons, and rhinoplasty surgeons. Patients were also asked to fill out questionnaires, including the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation and the Standardized Cosmesis and Health Nasal Outcomes Survey.
A total of 78 participants were included within the analysis. Overall, the evaluators correctly identified the surgical approach 52.9% of the time. Rhinoplasty surgeons demonstrated the least interrater variability when compared with the general population and plastic surgeons. Overall mean obstruction composite scores from the Rhinoplasty Outcomes Evaluation and Standardized Cosmesis and Health Nasal Outcomes Survey questionnaire were comparable between DP and NDP cohorts.
Across evaluators, there were comparable functional, aesthetic, and patient-reported outcomes between DP and NDP cohorts. Given its key advantage of ensuring the stability of the osseocartilaginous framework, DP should be performed for appropriate patients given its favorable aesthetic and functional outcomes.
Therapeutic, III. |
Author | Khetpal, Sumun Cascavita, Catherine Ibrahim, Yasmine Khan, Awais Roostaeian, Jason Wolfe, Erin M Klomhaus, Alexandra McCleary, Sean |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Sean surname: McCleary fullname: McCleary, Sean organization: From the Divisions of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery – sequence: 2 givenname: Awais surname: Khan fullname: Khan, Awais organization: From the Divisions of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery – sequence: 3 givenname: Sumun surname: Khetpal fullname: Khetpal, Sumun organization: From the Divisions of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery – sequence: 4 givenname: Catherine surname: Cascavita fullname: Cascavita, Catherine organization: From the Divisions of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery – sequence: 5 givenname: Yasmine surname: Ibrahim fullname: Ibrahim, Yasmine organization: From the Divisions of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery – sequence: 6 givenname: Erin M surname: Wolfe fullname: Wolfe, Erin M organization: Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Southern California – sequence: 7 givenname: Alexandra surname: Klomhaus fullname: Klomhaus, Alexandra organization: General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, University of California, Los Angeles – sequence: 8 givenname: Jason surname: Roostaeian fullname: Roostaeian, Jason organization: From the Divisions of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40331571$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNpFkN1KAzEQhYMo9kffQCQv0JpM9qfxRkprVSi0tBUvS5pM6Mo2uyTZSi98d1dUnIszF-fMB3N65NxVDgm54WzImczvlqv1kP0PB5ayM9LlKchBAgl0SC-E99bIRZZekk7ChOBpzrvkc1r5oEq69BjQH1UsKkeP6EMT6KJGR9fRNzo2vs2s9oWr6lKFeLqnE-XoG9INliWNe6TTwlr06DTSHcYPbE_HGFonFpoqZ-iscfqb3oIWTdTVAcPDFbmwqgx4_bv75HX2uJk8D-aLp5fJeD7QAMBatVq3zwgwiZaWqxGCNSgAMzaSnJnESATQ0qgMTZ7l1kKacCkEgmZiB31y-8Otm90Bzbb2xUH50_avB_gCIMBiXg |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | Copyright © 2025 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons. |
Copyright_xml | – notice: Copyright © 2025 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons. |
DBID | CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM |
DOI | 10.1097/PRS.0000000000012050 |
DatabaseName | Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed |
DatabaseTitle | MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) |
DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: EIF name: MEDLINE url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search sourceTypes: Index Database |
DeliveryMethod | no_fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine |
EISSN | 1529-4242 |
ExternalDocumentID | 40331571 |
Genre | Journal Article Comparative Study |
GroupedDBID | --- .-D .XZ .Z2 01R 0R~ 123 1J1 354 40H 4Q1 4Q2 4Q3 5RE 5VS 71W 77Y 7O~ AAAAV AAAXR AAGIX AAHPQ AAIQE AAMOA AAMTA AAQKA AARTV AASCR AASOK AASXQ AAUEB AAXQO ABASU ABBUW ABDIG ABJNI ABOCM ABPXF ABVCZ ABXVJ ABZAD ABZZY ACDDN ACDOF ACEWG ACGFO ACGFS ACILI ACLDA ACNWC ACOAL ACWDW ACWRI ACXJB ACXNZ ACZKN ADGGA ADHPY ADSXY AE6 AENEX AFBFQ AFDTB AFMBP AFSOK AFUWQ AGINI AHOMT AHQNM AHVBC AIJEX AINUH AJCLO AJIOK AJNWD AJZMW AKCTQ AKULP ALKUP ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALMTX AMJPA AMKUR AMNEI AOHHW AOQMC BOYCO BQLVK BYPQX C45 CGR CS3 CUY CVF DIWNM DU5 E.X EBS ECM EEVPB EIF ERAAH EX3 F2K F2L F2M F2N F5P FCALG FL- GNXGY GQDEL H0~ HLJTE HZ~ IKREB IKYAY IN~ IPNFZ JF7 JK3 K8S KD2 KMI L-C L7B N9A NPM N~7 N~B O9- OAG OAH OBH OHH OL1 OLB OLG OLH OLU OLV OLY OLZ OPUJH OVD OVDNE OVIDH OVLEI OVOZU OWU OWV OWW OWX OWY OWZ OXXIT P2P RIG RLZ RXW S4R S4S TAF TEORI TSPGW TWZ V2I VVN W3M WH7 WOQ WOW X3V X3W XXN XYM YOC ZFV ZY1 |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c2220-c2fcc15232d4c9f1a8e2fde32e608910d4d9e22c9da6ed767ff2541933e2c03b2 |
IngestDate | Fri Aug 29 02:29:43 EDT 2025 |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 3 |
Language | English |
License | Copyright © 2025 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons. |
LinkModel | OpenURL |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c2220-c2fcc15232d4c9f1a8e2fde32e608910d4d9e22c9da6ed767ff2541933e2c03b2 |
PMID | 40331571 |
ParticipantIDs | pubmed_primary_40331571 |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2025-September |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2025-09-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 09 year: 2025 text: 2025-September |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationPlace | United States |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: United States |
PublicationTitle | Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963) |
PublicationTitleAlternate | Plast Reconstr Surg |
PublicationYear | 2025 |
SSID | ssj0017365 |
Score | 2.4733293 |
Snippet | Preservation-with respect to the dorsum, nasal cartilages, and soft-tissue envelope-has reemerged as a guiding philosophy in rhinoplasty. Dorsal preservation... |
SourceID | pubmed |
SourceType | Index Database |
StartPage | 385 |
SubjectTerms | Adult Esthetics Female Humans Male Middle Aged Nasal Cartilages - surgery Patient Reported Outcome Measures Patient Satisfaction Retrospective Studies Rhinoplasty - methods Treatment Outcome Young Adult |
Title | Dorsal Preservation versus Open Structural Rhinoplasty: Can We Tell the Difference between Aesthetic and Functional Outcomes? |
URI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40331571 |
Volume | 156 |
hasFullText | |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1LbxMxELZSkKpeEG8oD_nALVrYtb2bmAuKUqoKFKhKqvZWre1ZJYcmEcm2EhK_jj_GeMf7aCkIyMGK1htr4_k8npkdf8PYK406Dr0uiOwwg8ib1JGBzEVGWytjbSzRNU0-ZQfH6sNpetrr_ehkLZUb89p-u_Fcyf9IFa-hXP0p2X-QbDMoXsDvKF9sUcLY_pWM95Zf1zjFPo2ijq32fZpFue77RBH_yrm0RKxxNJsvlis0lTcVxdMYl_UJ9Kc-cudNz71QJwVXeZ25NcL9YgY1n-s-7n8hbPi53OCf8bl0V3ICD_3g4e7KzQ7UtBfQX9PZ64oUCpdiJ_owsWNft4ISzqBF6scZBWZHl_m8fd2Ej7OqChSgvjsvm5vH-drmF3Oyg5sjjd14hkibhC3cjoIOFjpSQl1V0kQ_HtAoOypXUsmfX7YCohg-PPpCFJX0SURMPLcddKzOK3ioWMokpXowf-69RtBdd22xLXRVfO1VHzAKL7IGMkvrE5t68Oamx9lh2_UQ13ybysaZ3mV3gnPCR4S0e6wHi_tsexLSLx6w7wQ43gUcJ8BxDzjeAo53APeWI9z4CXAPN47i4S3ceIAbb-DGEUC8hRuv4fbuITvefz8dH0Shfkdk0eqMsS2sRWlK4ZTVRZIPQRQOpIAsHqKZ6pTTIITVLs_ADbJBUYhUoUchQaCOMOIRu7VYLuAJ44XNcTt0KrGFVNqkRqYux98PEymVyeOn7DFN3NmKSFrO6ind_W3PM7bT4u85u12gVoAXaGJuzMtKiD8B-ZV9Mw |
linkProvider | National Library of Medicine |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Dorsal+Preservation+versus+Open+Structural+Rhinoplasty%3A+Can+We+Tell+the+Difference+between+Aesthetic+and+Functional+Outcomes%3F&rft.jtitle=Plastic+and+reconstructive+surgery+%281963%29&rft.au=McCleary%2C+Sean&rft.au=Khan%2C+Awais&rft.au=Khetpal%2C+Sumun&rft.au=Cascavita%2C+Catherine&rft.date=2025-09-01&rft.eissn=1529-4242&rft.volume=156&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=385&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097%2FPRS.0000000000012050&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F40331571&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F40331571&rft.externalDocID=40331571 |