Comparative outcomes in functional rhinoplasty with open vs endonasal spreader graft placement

Jason Talmadge, Robin High, William Wesley Heckman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Importance Spreader grafts are commonly used for nasal valve stenosis. There is debate among practitioners regarding the optimal approach for spreader graft placement. Objective This study aimed to determine whether an endonasal spreader graft placement leads to equivalent postoperative outcomes using a standardized nasal obstruction symptom score and whether there is a significant difference in operative time between the 2 approaches. Design A retrospective review of functional rhinoplasties by a single facial plastic surgeon over a 2-year period was conducted. Setting Facial plastic surgery practice at a tertiary academic medical center. Participants Fifty patients with a single surgeon over a 22-month period with a minimum of 1-year follow-up were included in the study. Age, sex, and preoperative Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scores of patients were equivalent between the 2 groups. For time analysis, 56 of 107 patients were analyzed, with exclusion of patients undergoing combined procedures and autologous cartilage grafting from sites besides the nasal septum. Interventions Patients who underwent functional rhinoplasty through either an open or an endonasal (closed) approach were compared. Preoperative approach decision was based on the need for cosmetic tip, dorsal, or anterior septal work, and all decisions were made before the development of this study. Main outcome measures were as follows: improvement in NOSE scores recorded preoperatively and at 1-year minimum postoperative follow-up as well as difference in operative times. Results No significant difference (P = 0.92) was found between patients having open or endonasal spreader graft placement in NOSE score improvement. Open rhinoplasty was associated with significantly longer operative times (P < 0.001), and performance of additional maneuvers such as strut grafts, osteotomies, and dorsal hump reduction was not found to independently affect operative times significantly. Conclusions and Relevance Spreader grafts can be placed through an endonasal or open approach with similar outcomes in a standardized measure. Open rhinoplasty is associated with prolonged operative times and therefore increased operative costs. In properly selected patients, endonasal spreader graft placement may lead to significant cost savings when open rhinoplasty is not otherwise indicated.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)468-471
Number of pages4
JournalAnnals of Plastic Surgery
Volume80
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2018

Fingerprint

Rhinoplasty
Operative Time
Nasal Obstruction
Transplants
Symptom Assessment
Nasal Septum
Cost Savings
Plastic Surgery
Osteotomy
Nose
Cosmetics
Cartilage
Pathologic Constriction
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Costs and Cost Analysis

Keywords

  • Rhinoplasty

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Comparative outcomes in functional rhinoplasty with open vs endonasal spreader graft placement. / Talmadge, Jason; High, Robin; Heckman, William Wesley.

In: Annals of Plastic Surgery, Vol. 80, No. 5, 01.05.2018, p. 468-471.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1fb4ab589aa94a55ae78115c7c408b30,
title = "Comparative outcomes in functional rhinoplasty with open vs endonasal spreader graft placement",
abstract = "Importance Spreader grafts are commonly used for nasal valve stenosis. There is debate among practitioners regarding the optimal approach for spreader graft placement. Objective This study aimed to determine whether an endonasal spreader graft placement leads to equivalent postoperative outcomes using a standardized nasal obstruction symptom score and whether there is a significant difference in operative time between the 2 approaches. Design A retrospective review of functional rhinoplasties by a single facial plastic surgeon over a 2-year period was conducted. Setting Facial plastic surgery practice at a tertiary academic medical center. Participants Fifty patients with a single surgeon over a 22-month period with a minimum of 1-year follow-up were included in the study. Age, sex, and preoperative Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scores of patients were equivalent between the 2 groups. For time analysis, 56 of 107 patients were analyzed, with exclusion of patients undergoing combined procedures and autologous cartilage grafting from sites besides the nasal septum. Interventions Patients who underwent functional rhinoplasty through either an open or an endonasal (closed) approach were compared. Preoperative approach decision was based on the need for cosmetic tip, dorsal, or anterior septal work, and all decisions were made before the development of this study. Main outcome measures were as follows: improvement in NOSE scores recorded preoperatively and at 1-year minimum postoperative follow-up as well as difference in operative times. Results No significant difference (P = 0.92) was found between patients having open or endonasal spreader graft placement in NOSE score improvement. Open rhinoplasty was associated with significantly longer operative times (P < 0.001), and performance of additional maneuvers such as strut grafts, osteotomies, and dorsal hump reduction was not found to independently affect operative times significantly. Conclusions and Relevance Spreader grafts can be placed through an endonasal or open approach with similar outcomes in a standardized measure. Open rhinoplasty is associated with prolonged operative times and therefore increased operative costs. In properly selected patients, endonasal spreader graft placement may lead to significant cost savings when open rhinoplasty is not otherwise indicated.",
keywords = "Rhinoplasty",
author = "Jason Talmadge and Robin High and Heckman, {William Wesley}",
year = "2018",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/SAP.0000000000001434",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "80",
pages = "468--471",
journal = "Annals of Plastic Surgery",
issn = "0148-7043",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparative outcomes in functional rhinoplasty with open vs endonasal spreader graft placement

AU - Talmadge, Jason

AU - High, Robin

AU - Heckman, William Wesley

PY - 2018/5/1

Y1 - 2018/5/1

N2 - Importance Spreader grafts are commonly used for nasal valve stenosis. There is debate among practitioners regarding the optimal approach for spreader graft placement. Objective This study aimed to determine whether an endonasal spreader graft placement leads to equivalent postoperative outcomes using a standardized nasal obstruction symptom score and whether there is a significant difference in operative time between the 2 approaches. Design A retrospective review of functional rhinoplasties by a single facial plastic surgeon over a 2-year period was conducted. Setting Facial plastic surgery practice at a tertiary academic medical center. Participants Fifty patients with a single surgeon over a 22-month period with a minimum of 1-year follow-up were included in the study. Age, sex, and preoperative Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scores of patients were equivalent between the 2 groups. For time analysis, 56 of 107 patients were analyzed, with exclusion of patients undergoing combined procedures and autologous cartilage grafting from sites besides the nasal septum. Interventions Patients who underwent functional rhinoplasty through either an open or an endonasal (closed) approach were compared. Preoperative approach decision was based on the need for cosmetic tip, dorsal, or anterior septal work, and all decisions were made before the development of this study. Main outcome measures were as follows: improvement in NOSE scores recorded preoperatively and at 1-year minimum postoperative follow-up as well as difference in operative times. Results No significant difference (P = 0.92) was found between patients having open or endonasal spreader graft placement in NOSE score improvement. Open rhinoplasty was associated with significantly longer operative times (P < 0.001), and performance of additional maneuvers such as strut grafts, osteotomies, and dorsal hump reduction was not found to independently affect operative times significantly. Conclusions and Relevance Spreader grafts can be placed through an endonasal or open approach with similar outcomes in a standardized measure. Open rhinoplasty is associated with prolonged operative times and therefore increased operative costs. In properly selected patients, endonasal spreader graft placement may lead to significant cost savings when open rhinoplasty is not otherwise indicated.

AB - Importance Spreader grafts are commonly used for nasal valve stenosis. There is debate among practitioners regarding the optimal approach for spreader graft placement. Objective This study aimed to determine whether an endonasal spreader graft placement leads to equivalent postoperative outcomes using a standardized nasal obstruction symptom score and whether there is a significant difference in operative time between the 2 approaches. Design A retrospective review of functional rhinoplasties by a single facial plastic surgeon over a 2-year period was conducted. Setting Facial plastic surgery practice at a tertiary academic medical center. Participants Fifty patients with a single surgeon over a 22-month period with a minimum of 1-year follow-up were included in the study. Age, sex, and preoperative Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scores of patients were equivalent between the 2 groups. For time analysis, 56 of 107 patients were analyzed, with exclusion of patients undergoing combined procedures and autologous cartilage grafting from sites besides the nasal septum. Interventions Patients who underwent functional rhinoplasty through either an open or an endonasal (closed) approach were compared. Preoperative approach decision was based on the need for cosmetic tip, dorsal, or anterior septal work, and all decisions were made before the development of this study. Main outcome measures were as follows: improvement in NOSE scores recorded preoperatively and at 1-year minimum postoperative follow-up as well as difference in operative times. Results No significant difference (P = 0.92) was found between patients having open or endonasal spreader graft placement in NOSE score improvement. Open rhinoplasty was associated with significantly longer operative times (P < 0.001), and performance of additional maneuvers such as strut grafts, osteotomies, and dorsal hump reduction was not found to independently affect operative times significantly. Conclusions and Relevance Spreader grafts can be placed through an endonasal or open approach with similar outcomes in a standardized measure. Open rhinoplasty is associated with prolonged operative times and therefore increased operative costs. In properly selected patients, endonasal spreader graft placement may lead to significant cost savings when open rhinoplasty is not otherwise indicated.

KW - Rhinoplasty

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85045901768&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85045901768&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/SAP.0000000000001434

DO - 10.1097/SAP.0000000000001434

M3 - Article

C2 - 29537996

AN - SCOPUS:85045901768

VL - 80

SP - 468

EP - 471

JO - Annals of Plastic Surgery

JF - Annals of Plastic Surgery

SN - 0148-7043

IS - 5

ER -