Revision Rhinoplasty: Retrospective Chart Review Analysis of Deformities and Surgical Maneuvers in Patients with Nasal Airway Obstruction—Five Years of Experience

Abstract

Nasal airway obstruction is one of the most frequent causes of revision rhinoplasty in patients after previous rhinoplasty procedure. Purpose of this study is to present the deformities and the surgical maneuvers conducted in revision rhinoplasty patients with functional complaint, anatomical sites at risk, and potential prophylactic maneuvers. This study is a retrospective chart review analysis of 46 consecutive revision rhinoplasty procedures in patients with nasal airway obstruction. Inclusion criteria were at least one previous rhinoplasty and nasal airway obstruction as the epicenter of patients' complaint. Thorough clinical examination to certify the obstruction was performed. Deformities noted were separated in three categories according to functional, cosmetic, and combination of functional and cosmetic implications. Surgical maneuvers conducted were reviewed. Deformities found were checked for statistically significant coexistences. The average patient age was 34.9 years. The mean number of previous septorhinoplasties was 1.33. Nasal ventilation obstruction mainly caused either by septum deviation or nasal valve dysfunction was identified in 91.3% of our patients. Surgical maneuvers conducted included placement of grafts in 89.1% of all cases, septoplasty in 76.1%, lateral wall support in 47.8%, and placement of spreader grafts in 39.1% of patients. The average preoperative Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) score was 61 ± 15 and it improved substantially, even from month 1, postoperatively. Owing to high prevalence of nasal airway obstruction after primary or secondary rhinoplasty, we conducted the first retrospective chart review study to identify the most common deformities in revision rhinoplasty patients with nasal airway obstruction and the appropriate surgical maneuvers to address them. Septum deviation and nasal valve dysfunction were the two pillars of nasal airway obstruction in those patients.

Keywords

nasal airway obstruction - revision rhinoplasty - functional complaint

• References

• 1 Lee M, Zwiebel S, Guyuron B. Frequency of the preoperative flaws and commonly required maneuvers to correct them: a guide to reducing the revision rhinoplasty rate. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 132 (04) 769-776
• 2 Bussi M, Palonta F, Toma S. Grafting in revision rhinoplasty. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2013; 33 (03) 183-189
• 3 Yu K, Kim A, Pearlman SJ. Functional and aesthetic concerns of patients seeking revision rhinoplasty. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2010; 12 (05) 291-297
• 4 Adamson PA, Warner J, Becker D, Romo III TJ, Toriumi DM. Revision rhinoplasty: panel discussion, controversies, and techniques. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2014; 22 (01) 57-96
• 5 Becker DG, Becker SS. Reducing complications in rhinoplasty. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2006; 39 (03) 475-492 , viii
• 6 Becker DG, Bloom J. Five techniques that i cannot live without in revision rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 2008; 24 (03) 358-364
• 7 Fattahi T. Considerations in revision rhinoplasty: lessons learned. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 2011; 23 (01) 101-108 , vi
• 8 Kamer FM, McQuown SA. Revision rhinoplasty. Analysis and treatment. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1988; 114 (03) 257-266
• 9 Pearlman SJ, Talei BA. An anatomic basis for revision rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 2012; 28 (04) 390-397
• 10 Mazzola RF, Felisati G. Secondary rhinoplasty: analysis of the deformity and guidelines for management. Facial Plast Surg 1997; 13 (03) 163-177
• 11 Waite PD. Avoiding revision rhinoplasty. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 2011; 23 (01) 93-100 , vi
• 12 Afifi AM, Kempton SJ, Gordon CR. , et al. Evaluating current functional airway surgery during rhinoplasty: a survey of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2015; 39 (02) 181-190
• 13 Calvert JW, Patel AC, Daniel RK. Reconstructive rhinoplasty: operative revision of patients with previous autologous costal cartilage grafts. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014; 133 (05) 1087-1096
• 14 Constantian MB. What motivates secondary rhinoplasty? A study of 150 consecutive patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012; 130 (03) 667-678
• 15 Foda HM. Rhinoplasty for the multiply revised nose. Am J Otolaryngol 2005; 26 (01) 28-34
• 16 Vuyk HD, Watts SJ, Vindayak B. Revision rhinoplasty: review of deformities, aetiology and treatment strategies. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2000; 25 (06) 476-481
• 17 Thomson C, Mendelsohn M. Reducing the incidence of revision rhinoplasty. J Otolaryngol 2007; 36 (02) 130-134
• 18 Chauhan N, Alexander AJ, Sepehr A, Adamson PA. Patient complaints with primary versus revision rhinoplasty: analysis and practice implications. Aesthet Surg J 2011; 31 (07) 775-780
• 19 Ballert JA, Park SS. Functional considerations in revision rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 2008; 24 (03) 348-357
• 20 Adamson PA. The failed rhinoplasty. In: Gates GA. , ed. Current Therapy in Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery. Philadelphia, PA: B.C. Decker; 1990: 137-144
• 21 Constantian MB, Clardy RB. The relative importance of septal and nasal valvular surgery in correcting airway obstruction in primary and secondary rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 1996; 98 (01) 38-54 , discussion 55–58
• 22 Doty RL, Frye R. Influence of nasal obstruction on smell function. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1989; 22 (02) 397-411
• 23 Toriumi DM. Discussion: Frequency of the preoperative flaws and commonly required maneuvers to correct them: a guide to reducing the revision rhinoplasty rate. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 132 (04) 777-779
• 24 Defatta RJ, Williams III EF. The decision process in choosing costal cartilage for use in revision rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 2008; 24 (03) 365-371
• 25 Rhee JS, Sullivan CD, Frank DO, Kimbell JS, Garcia GJ. A systematic review of patient-reported nasal obstruction scores: defining normative and symptomatic ranges in surgical patients. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2014; 16 (03) 219-225 , quiz 232