Search

Dorsal preservation involves eliminating the dorsal hump by performing reduction while preserving the patient's natural dorsal anatomy. This can involve surface manipulation or foundational techniques or a combination of both. When surgeons begin performing dorsal preservation, there are important factors to consider to avoid complications. In an effort to inform surgeons on how to avoid unfavorable outcomes, I will discuss my first 20 cases where I performed dorsal preservation. I review less than ideal outcomes and how these issues can be prevented.

Augmentation of the nasal dorsum is frequently required in the ethnic rhinoplasty patient to create a narrowing effect and to balance the upper two thirds of the nose with the desired increase in tip projection. The subdorsal cantilever graft (SDCG) provides a method to elevate the nasal dorsum to complement the increase in nasal tip projection. SDCG type A is situated below the bony dorsum and acts to raise the dorsum with limited elevation of the radix. The SDCG type B extends through a radix osteotomy site and raises the radix down to the supratip after complete release of the bony dorsum and middle nasal vault. Placement of the SDCG below the dorsum has many advantages, including preserving the features of the natural dorsum (dorsal aesthetic lines), controlled narrowing, and camouflage of the subdorsal graft. This is a complex procedure that requires a good understanding of dorsal preservation techniques. Use of the SDCG to raise the nasal dorsum in ethnic patients combines structure rhinoplasty with the principles of dorsal preservation for augmentation of the profile in patients with a low dorsum.

The subdorsal cantilever graft (SDCG) is a costal cartilage graft that is positioned below the nasal dorsum to control the position of the nasal bones and middle nasal vault. SDCG type A is used to raise the middle nasal vault and caudal nasal bones to correct the saddle nose deformity. SDCG type B can be used to raise the entire dorsum of the nose (radix, bony vault, and middle vault) in the ethnic augmentation rhinoplasty patient. This article will discuss the indications and technique of the SDCG in dorsal preservation rhinoplasty.

Background: Postoperative infections after rhinoplasties are rare, yet devastating on patient outcomes. The literature reports an overall incidence of

The saddle nose deformity typically occurs after the loss of underlying septal support with loss of projection of the middle nasal vault. This creates a saddling effect as the upper lateral cartilages contract and forms a dip in the profile. The saddle nose deformity can occur from many different etiologies, including septal hematoma, fracture of the septum after trauma, disruption of the dorsal L-strut support after septoplasty, and metabolic disorders resulting in the loss of septal support. In most cases, the nasal bones remain in their native position creating a discrepancy in dorsal height and deformity. Correction of the saddle nose deformity can be performed using one of the two primary approaches. The most basic option is to simply fill the defect with a cartilage onlay graft (solid graft, diced cartilage and fascia, and so on) to create a normal dorsal line. This approach can be effective in many cases. Over time, the onlay graft may descend and create deformity or become visible. The other approach involves opening the middle nasal vault, placing spreader grafts, and reconstituting the dorsal L-strut, performing septal reconstruction or extracorporeal septoplasty. In this paper, we present our technique of repairing the saddle nose deformity using a “push up” method that preserves the middle vault anatomy and reconstitutes the proper projection of the middle-third of the nose.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW To present the novel technique of subdorsal Z-flap in dorsal preservation rhinoplasty and give an overview on current available dorsal preservation techniques in the literature. RECENT FINDINGS The subdorsal Z-flap combines the advantages of the high and low septal strip techniques in dorsal preservation rhinoplasty and ensures well tolerated treatment of the dorsal hump and structural stability. SUMMARY The technique and concept of Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty (DPR) has been used for more than a century but only recently gained significant popularity along with specific technical refinements. The advantage of DPR lies in the preservation of the delicate triangular cartilaginous unity of the septal and upper lateral cartilages with its functional and esthetic implications in contrast to all resecting techniques. A variety of modifications of DPR have been published in recent years, each with advantages and disadvantages. The issue of hump recurrence remains a major concern in DPR. We describe the 'subdorsal Z-flap' and related techniques of DPR in detail, present two clinical case studies and discuss alternative technical modifications. The 'subdorsal Z -flap' combines the advantages of the high septal strip procedure with the advantages of the traditional 'low septal strip' or Cottle technique. By starting the incision at a high level, final septal height can be adjusted precisely. By creating a triangular shape with a vertical cut below the K-Area, which is usually the highest point of the hump, significant leverage can be applied from below the hump and the septal overlap may be sutured securely for a stable correction. In combination with Piezo osteotomy and full open approach, great precision and predictability can be achieved. In a recent publication, we presented more than 100 consecutive cases of subdorsal Z-flap DPR with good functional and esthetic outcomes. The subdorsal Z-flap modification is a combination of two popular DPR techniques, fusing their advantages while minimizing risk profile. A slightly higher degree of technical difficulty and necessary tissue dissection provides the benefits of better predictability and reduction of adverse outcomes.

Preservation rhinoplasty is making a resurgence as a reliable method of performing primary rhinoplasty. Dorsal preservation is an important part of the approach to preserve favorable nasal contours when performing rhinoplasty. Keys to success require proper patient selection and careful execution. There are potential sequelae, such saddle nose deformity, recurrence of the dorsal convexity, cerebrospinal fluid leak, and radix step-off. This article discusses methods and adjustments in technique to help minimize these potential problems when performing dorsal preservation.

Structural preservation rhinoplasty merges two popular philosophies of rhinoplasty-structure rhinoplasty and preservation rhinoplasty-in an effort to maximize patient outcomes, aesthetics, and function. This allows the surgeon to both preserve the favorable attributes of the nose, and also to structure the nasal tip and dorsum with grafts to maximize contour and support. The concept of dorsal preservation is to preserve favorable dorsal aesthetic lines without the creation of an "open roof." However, the addition of some structure concepts can expand the utility of dorsal preservation in primary rhinoplasty patients. The authors discuss these structure concepts and their applicability to dorsal preservation.

Preservation rhinoplasty in general and dorsal preservation in particular are for sure one of the most attractive topics in modern rhinoplasty and probably the most puzzling concept in this field. Recent major meetings and many other publications have led to an increased interest in these old/new techniques. New strategies for preservation have been developed in recent years, with a broader range of indications than the older push/let down. A simple classification urges to clarify this puzzled semantic concept of "preservation". Is it possible to systematize all new preservation variations in a simple classification? Yes, in this viewpoint, we propose a simple classification that systematizes all kinds of preservation techniques-the old and the new techniques. Classifying preservation will clarify the relative position of all techniques. It will allow comparing procedures from similar families there so to compare outcomes and indications from each technique.

Introduction: The basis of dorsal preservation rhinoplasty goes back to the late 19th and the early 20th centuries. In that era, pioneers such as Drs. Goodale, Lothrop, and Cottle were prominent surgeons who reported on this technique. Currently, there has been a renewed interest of this technique that stems from the nasal anatomy and an interest in less destructive techniques. In this review, we discuss examples of the contributions of those surgeons, which represent some of the earliest experiences in this field. Methods: We reviewed several journals from the late 19th and early 20th centuries as detailed in the references section. We collected the related publications on closed reduction techniques performed by Drs. Goodale, Lothrop, and Cottle. Results: The publications on closed reduction techniques by Drs. Goodale, Lothrop, and Cottle described similar thought processes and techniques comparable to current dorsal preservation rhinoplasty techniques. The thought processes of these 3 renowned rhinoplasty surgeons appear to be very much relevant today. Conclusions: Although there has been recent resurgence in dorsal preservation rhinoplasty techniques due to anatomical and functional aspects of the nose, the basis of dorsal preservation rhinoplasty goes far back to more than 100 years ago.

To present the novel technique of subdorsal Z-flap in dorsal preservation rhinoplasty and give an overview on current available dorsal preservation techniques in the literature.The subdorsal Z-flap combines the advantages of the high and low septal strip techniques in dorsal preservation rhinoplasty and ensures well tolerated treatment of the dorsal hump and structural stability.The technique and concept of Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty (DPR) has been used for more than a century but only recently gained significant popularity along with specific technical refinements. The advantage of DPR lies in the preservation of the delicate triangular cartilaginous unity of the septal and upper lateral cartilages with its functional and esthetic implications in contrast to all resecting techniques. A variety of modifications of DPR have been published in recent years, each with advantages and disadvantages. The issue of hump recurrence remains a major concern in DPR. We describe the 'subdorsal Z-flap' and related techniques of DPR in detail, present two clinical case studies and discuss alternative technical modifications. The 'subdorsal Z -flap' combines the advantages of the high septal strip procedure with the advantages of the traditional 'low septal strip' or Cottle technique. By starting the incision at a high level, final septal height can be adjusted precisely. By creating a triangular shape with a vertical cut below the K-Area, which is usually the highest point of the hump, significant leverage can be applied from below the hump and the septal overlap may be sutured securely for a stable correction. In combination with Piezo osteotomy and full open approach, great precision and predictability can be achieved. In a recent publication, we presented more than 100 consecutive cases of subdorsal Z-flap DPR with good functional and esthetic outcomes. The subdorsal Z-flap modification is a combination of two popular DPR techniques, fusing their advantages while minimizing risk profile. A slightly higher degree of technical difficulty and necessary tissue dissection provides the benefits of better predictability and reduction of adverse outcomes.

Preservation rhinoplasty is making a resurgence as a reliable method of performing primary rhinoplasty. Dorsal preservation is an important part of the approach to preserve favorable nasal contours when performing rhinoplasty. Keys to success require proper patient selection and careful execution. There are potential sequelae, such saddle nose deformity, recurrence of the dorsal convexity, cerebrospinal fluid leak, and radix step-off. This article discusses methods and adjustments in technique to help minimize these potential problems when performing dorsal preservation.

Nasal valve collapse has multiple causes, including congenital, traumatic, and, unfortunately, iatrogenic. Recognition of the causes of nasal valve collapse and the methodology for treatment is paramount not only for the otolaryngologist but also for any physician managing the nasal airway. This article focuses on the cause and surgical management of internal and external nasal valve collapse.

Significant nasal septal deviation may require complex reconstruction to achieve complete correction. Subtotal septal reconstruction is a method for addressing deviations in the L-strut.To review the long-term outcomes of subtotal septal reconstruction and provide objective evidence of functional and aesthetic improvement.This medical record review obtained data on 144 patients who underwent subtotal septal reconstruction from September 1, 2008, to September 1, 2013. Data analysis was performed from September 1, 2013, to September 1, 2014.Functional outcomes were measured using the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) questionnaire, and objective aesthetic outcomes were measured using 3-dimensional (3-D) stereophotogrammetry. Follow-up times were classified as time point 1 (TP1; preoperative), time point 2 (TP2; early postoperative), and time point 3 (TP3; final postoperative).Of the 144 patients who underwent subtotal septal reconstruction, 104 (72.2%) were female; the mean (SD) age was 37.3 (13.7) years; 57 underwent primary septorhinoplasty; and 87 (60.5%) underwent revision septorhinoplasty. The NOSE scores improved in all 5 categories of nasal obstruction, with mean (SD) survey completion at 270 (260.1) days. Aesthetic results were measured with 3-D imaging after a mean (SD) follow-up of 613.5 (434.4) days postoperatively. No statistically significant loss was found in mean (SD) nasal length over time (TP2 to TP 3, -0.16 [1.36] mm; 95% CI, -0.54 to 0.22 mm; P = .41) or between mean (SD) postoperative loss of projection (TP2 and TP3, -0.19 [0.92] mm, 95% CI, -0.45 to 0.07 mm; P = .17). An increase in mean (SD) rotation (nasolabial angle) generated with septorhinoplasty (4.24° [11.08°]; 95% CI, 1.14°-7.34°; P = .01) and a mean (SD) decrease in rotation detected during postoperative healing (-2.63° [6.96°]; 95% CI, -4.63° to -0.63°; P = .01) were found. Although measurement of symmetry was improved in the early postoperative period (TP1 to TP2, -0.16 [1.26] mm; 95% CI, -0.52 to 0.20 mm; P = .40), this finding did not become statistically significant until the final measurement (TP1 to TP3, -0.43 [1.07] mm; 95% CI, -0.73 to -0.13 mm; P = .007; TP2 to TP3, -0.28 [0.87] mm; 95% CI, -0.53 to -0.03 mm; P = .03). A mean (SD) decrease in columellar show was achieved with surgery (-0.66 [1.37] mm; 95% CI, -1.05 to -0.27 mm; P = .001). No statistically significant change was found in the alar-columellar association from TP2 to TP3 in this patient population, confirming no unwanted alar or columellar retraction over time (0.10 [0.61] mm; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.27 mm; P = .25). A total of 114 patients (79.2%) required costal cartilage harvest for adequate reconstruction.Subtotal septal reconstruction yields improved functional and aesthetic outcomes and has the potential to be a useful tool for the rhinoplasty surgeon in the treatment of severe septal deviation.4.

Closure of septal perforations remains a technically difficult procedure to perform.To assess the use of costal perichondrium as an interpositional graft to enhance closure of septal perforations using bilateral mucosal flaps and the effectiveness of the procedure.This case series included all 51 consecutive patients presenting with septal perforations from January 1, 2006, to August 31, 2014, at a single institution. Mean (SD) follow-up was 19 (18) months. Patients with subtotal perforations did not have their perforations closed but underwent rhinoplasty with improved form and function. All patients underwent evaluation for changes in postoperative symptoms.Bipedicled mucoperichondrial flaps with placement of costal perichondrium between the repaired flaps.Success rate of septal perforation closures and the clinical impact of the success of closure as experienced by the patient using the validated Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) questionnaire (range, 0-20; higher scores indicate greater obstruction).Of the 51 patients (14 male; 37 female; median age, 42.6 [range, 17-69] years), 44 underwent attempted closure of the perforation at the time of the procedure. Closure was successful in 42 of the 44 patients (95%).Two patients had persistent perforations, one of which was subsequently closed in a secondary procedure. Twenty-six of 51 patients with septal perforations completed preoperative and postoperative NOSE questionnaires. The mean (SD) preoperative and postoperative NOSE scores were 12.6 (4.2; range, 6-20) and 3.4 (3.8; range, 0-12), respectively (P .001). A mean (SD) improvement of 9.0 (3.9) points in the NOSE score was observed from patients after closure of their septal perforation, and 10 patients reported no symptoms (NOSE score, 0).Costal perichondrium is an effective interpositional graft to be used in conjunction with the bilateral mucoperichondrial flaps for closure of septal perforations. Costal perichondrium may be used to aid in closure rates of septal perforations.4.

The pinched nasal tip deformity often results as sequelae of prior nasal surgery. Conventional tip surgery techniques that overemphasize tip narrowing often deform the lateral crura and weaken support for the alar margin. The pinched nasal tip is characterized by the demarcation between the nasal tip and the alar lobule, isolating the tip from the surrounding nasal subunits. Lateral crural strut grafts with or without repositioning offer the surgeon a powerful maneuver that can help correct this functional and aesthetic deformity and restore a natural appearance to the nasal tip.