Download PDF
Facial Plast Surg
DOI: 10.1055/a-2611-1519
Original Article

Reduction Rhinoplasty's Bad Wrap—Is it Time to Forgive and Forget?... Or at Least Get a Rebrand?

Emily C. Deane 
1   Private Practice, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
,
Oren Friedman
2   Department of Otolaryngology Head & Neck Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Aims and Backgrounds

Destigmatizing reduction rhinoplasty in a structural preservation era.

Historical Aspects

Transition from the classic Joseph rhinoplasty to modern emphasis on structural preservation has imparted negative connotations to the term reduction.

Anatomy

Anatomic features that predispose patients to functional compromise must be recognized and addressed in all approaches to ensure successful surgical outcomes.

Technology

Piezo ultrasonic instruments provide a safe and precise way to reduce the bony framework and can be applied to all styles of rhinoplasty.

Patient Selection

Patients with no concomitant functional issues, reasonable and conservative cosmetic expectations, and strong cartilage framework, who are managed by a thoughtful surgeon can expect excellent results regardless of the approach.

Techniques

Reduction rhinoplasty techniques are some of the most enduring in rhinoplasty and safe limits are described.

Postoperative Care

Patients should be followed for functional and/or quality of life performance.

Current and Future Development

Precision recommendations regarding thresholds for resection and grafting, as well as standardized preoperative evaluation methods are required.

Conclusion and Clinical Relevance

Rhinoplasty techniques exist in a continuum as do features of the nose. A one-style-fits-all approach is not appropriate and leads to avoidable postoperative failures and revision surgery. Reduction rhinoplasty may not be the “buzz” but it still has a place in contemporary conservative cosmetic surgery.

Keywords

reduction rhinoplasty - cosmetic rhinoplasty - re-branding


Publication History

Article published online:
27 May 2025

© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Sylaidis P. Reduction rhinoplasty re-endorsed: when conservative and measured. JPRAS Open 2021; 30: 53-60
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Adamson P, Smith O, Cole P. The effect of cosmetic rhinoplasty on nasal patency. Laryngoscope 1990; 100 (04) 357-359
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Celebi S, Caglar E, Yilmaz B. et al. Does rhinoplasty reduce nasal patency?. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2014; 123 (10) 701-704
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Arima LM, Velasco LC, Tiago RSL. Avaliação de resultados em rinoplastia de redução. Arq Int Otorrinolaringol 2011; 15 (01) 79-83
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Grymer LF. Reduction rhinoplasty and nasal patency: change in the cross-sectional area of the nose evaluated by acoustic rhinometry. Laryngoscope 1995; 105 (4 Pt 1): 429-431
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Gassner HG, Ordonez F, Nunes R. The limits of evidence in rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 2023; 39 (04) 327-332
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Patel PN, Kandathil CK, Abdelhamid AS, Buba CM, Most SP. Matched cohort comparison of dorsal preservation and conventional hump resection rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2023; 47 (03) 1119-1129
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Saban Y, Daniel RK, Polselli R, Trapasso M, Palhazi P. Dorsal preservation: the push down technique reassessed. Aesthet Surg J 2018; 38 (02) 117-131
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Lee J, Abdul-Hamed S, Kazei D, Toriumi D, Lin SJ. The first descriptions of dorsal preservation rhinoplasty in the 19th and early- to mid-20th centuries and relevance today. Ear Nose Throat J 2021; 100 (10) 713-719
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Patel PN, Kandathil CK, Buba CM. et al. Global practice patterns of dorsal preservation rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2022; 24 (03) 171-177
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Friedman O, Cekic E, Gunel C. Functional rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2017; 25 (02) 195-199
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Behrbohm H, Briedigkeit W, Kaschke O. Jacques Joseph: father of modern facial plastic surgery. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2008; 10 (05) 300-303
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Roe JO. The deformity termed “pug nose” and its correction by a simple operation. By John Orlando Roe, 1887. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1989; 115 (02) 156-157
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Joseph J. Rhinoplasty and Facial Plastic Surgery: With a Supplement on Mammaplasty and Other Operations in the Field of Plastic Surgery of the Body: An Atlas and Textbook. Columella Press; 1987. . Accessed at: https://books.google.ca/books?id=sgzA3opK1D8C
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 15 Daniel RK, Sajadian A. Secondary rhinoplasty: management of the overresected dorsum. Facial Plast Surg 2012; 28 (04) 417-426
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Spataro E, Piccirillo JF, Kallogjeri D, Branham GH, Desai SC. Revision rates and risk factors of 175 842 patients undergoing septorhinoplasty. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2016; 18 (03) 212-219
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Toriumi DM. Structure Rhinoplasty: Lessons Learned in 30 Years. DMT Solutions; 2019
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 18 Hahn S, Becker DG. What are some tips and pearls for preserving and improving nasal function when performing a cosmetic rhinoplasty?. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2014; 22 (01) 58-62
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Zhang K, Deane EC, Becker DG. Persistent cosmetic dissatisfaction in rhinoplasty & management of the difficult patient. Plast Aesthet Res 2024; 11: 23
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Skoog T. Plastic Surgery: New Methods and Refinements. Almqvist & Wiksell; 1974. . Accessed at: https://books.google.ca/books?id=fAOXNgAACAAJ
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 21 Rohrich RJ, Muzaffar AR, Janis JE. Component dorsal hump reduction: the importance of maintaining dorsal aesthetic lines in rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004; 114 (05) 1298-1308 , discussion 1309–1312
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Alsakka MA, ElBestar M, Gharib FM, El-Antably AS, Al-Sebeih KH. Dorsal preservation rhinoplasty versus dorsal hump reduction: a randomized prospective study, functional and aesthetic outcomes. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2024; 281 (07) 3655-3669
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Foppiani JA, Joy N, Hernandez Alvarez A. et al. Dorsal preservation versus component dorsal hump reduction rhinoplasty: an assessment of patient-reported outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2024; 12 (08) e6103
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Fomon S, Gilbert JG, Caron AL, Segal S. Collapsed ala: pathologic physiology and management. Arch Otolaryngol 1950; 51 (04) 465-484
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Oneal RM, Berkowitz RL. Upper lateral cartilage spreader flaps in rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J 1998; 18 (05) 370-371
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Joseph J. The classic reprint: nasal reductions. Plast Reconstr Surg 1971; 47 (01) 79-83
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Webster RC, Davidson TM, Smith RC. Curved lateral osteotomy for airway protection in rhinoplasty. Arch Otolaryngol 1977; 103 (08) 454-458
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Kamburoglu HO, Bitik O, Vargel İ. Airflow considerations and the effect of Webster's triangle in reduction rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2021; 45 (05) 2244-2254
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Tardy M, Denneny J. Micro-osteotomies in rhinoplasty—a technical refinement. Facial Plast Surg 1984; 1 (02) 137-145
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Ponsky D, Eshraghi Y, Guyuron B. The frequency of surgical maneuvers during open rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010; 126 (01) 240-244
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Gerbault O, Daniel RK, Kosins AM. The role of piezoelectric instrumentation in rhinoplasty surgery. Aesthet Surg J 2016; 36 (01) 21-34
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Khajuria A, Krzak AM, Reddy RK, Lai K, Wignakumar T, Rohrich RJ. Piezoelectric osteotomy versus conventional osteotomy in rhinoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2022; 10 (11) e4673
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Gassner HG, Magdum AA, Tasman AJ. Minimally invasive techniques in rhinoplasty. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2020; 28 (04) 218-227
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Kisel J, Khatib M, Cavale N. A comparison between piezosurgery and conventional osteotomies in rhinoplasty on post-operative oedema and ecchymosis: a systematic review. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2023; 47 (03) 1144-1154
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Aymard JL. Some new points on the anatomy of the nasal septum, and their surgical significance. J Anat 1917; 51 (Pt 3): 293-303
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Rudy S, Moubayed SP, Most SP. Midvault reconstruction in primary rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 2017; 33 (02) 133-138
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Gruber RP, Park E, Newman J, Berkowitz L, Oneal R. The spreader flap in primary rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007; 119 (06) 1903-1910
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Minelli L, Callan PP. Inverted-V deformity: an anatomic study. Aesthet Surg J 2023; 43 (03) 290-294
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Kridel RWH, Yoon PJ, Koch RJ. Prevention and correction of nasal tip bossae in rhinoplasty. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2003; 5 (05) 416-422
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Gillman GS, Simons RL, Lee DJ. Nasal tip bossae in rhinoplasty. Etiology, predisposing factors, and management techniques. Arch Facial Plast Surg 1999; 1 (02) 83-89
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Anderson J. The dynamics of rhinoplasty. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Congress of Otolaryngology. Amsterdam (The Netherlands): Excerpta Medica; Published online 1969
    PubMed
  • 42 Tebbetts JB. Shaping and positioning the nasal tip without structural disruption: a new, systematic approach. Plast Reconstr Surg 1994; 94 (01) 61-77
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Oliaei S, Manuel C, Protsenko D, Hamamoto A, Chark D, Wong B. Mechanical analysis of the effects of cephalic trim on lower lateral cartilage stability. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2012; 14 (01) 27-30
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Nagarkar P, Stark RY, Pezeshk RA, Amirlak B, Rohrich RJ. Role of the cephalic trim in modern rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016; 137 (01) 89-96
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Abdelwahab M, Patel P, Kandathil CK, Wadhwa H, Most SP. Effect of lateral crural procedures on nasal wall stability and tip aesthetics in rhinoplasty. Laryngoscope 2021; 131 (06) E1830-E1837
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar