Download PDF
Facial Plast Surg 2022; 38(05): 514-517
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1748953
Original Article

Powered versus Cold Instruments in Rhinoplasty: A Perspective

Andrew A. Winkler 
1   Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Rhinoplasty surgeons must continually strive to refine and improve their results. Improvement may be borne out of new surgical techniques, alternative perioperative medicines, or through the application of new technologies. One technology that has recently gained popularity are piezoelectric osteotomes (POs). These instruments offer a powered alternative to the traditional chisel osteotome. This article provides a history of these two modalities, reviews the most recent data surrounding piezoelectric osteotomy, and provides a framework to compare the pros and cons of each osteotomy option.

Keywords

rhinoplasty - osteotomy - piezoelectric - cosmetic - nasal surgery


Publication History

Article published online:
15 November 2022

© 2022. Thieme. All rights reserved.

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

 

  • References

  • 1 Brorson S. Management of fractures of the humerus in Ancient Egypt, Greece, and Rome: an historical review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 467 (07) 1907-1914
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Joseph J. Ueber die operative Verkleinerungeiner Nase (Rhinomiosis). Berl Klin Wochenschr 1898; 40: 882
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Roe JO. The deformity termed “pug nose” and its correction, by a simple operation. Med Rec 1887; 31: 621-623
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Curie J, Curie P. Développement par compression de l'électricité polaire dans les cristaux hémièdres à faces inclinées. Bull Soc Minérol France 1880; 3 (04) 90-93
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kelly GG. Hard, brittle materials machined using ultrasonic vibrations. Materials Methods 1951; 34: 92
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Nielsen AG. Ultrasonic dental cutting instrument: II. J Am Dent Assoc 1955; 50 (04) 399-408
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 McFall TA, Yamane GM, Burnett GW. Comparison of the cutting effect on bone of an ultrasonic cutting device and rotary burs. J Oral Surg Anesth Hosp Dent Serv 1961; 19: 200-209
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Robiony M, Toro C, Costa F, Sembronio S, Polini F, Politi M. Osteotomie nasali in rinoplastica. Presentazione di un nuovo metodo alternativo agli scalpelli. Paper presented at the 53rd Congress of Italian Society of Plastic Surgery; September 16–18, 2004; Pisa, Italy
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Robiony M, Toro C, Costa F, Sembronio S, Polini F, Politi M. Piezosurgery: a new method for osteotomies in rhinoplasty. J Craniofac Surg 2007; 18 (05) 1098-1100
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Otake Y, Nakamura M, Henmi A, Takahashi T, Sasano Y. Experimental comparison of the performance of cutting bone and soft tissue between piezosurgery and conventional rotary instruments. Sci Rep 2018; 8 (01) 17154
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Demirbilek N, Evren C. Is piezoelectric surgery really harmless to soft tissue?. J Craniofac Surg 2019; 30 (07) 1966-1969
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Schütz S, Egger J, Kühl S, Filippi A, Lambrecht JT. Intraosseous temperature changes during the use of piezosurgical inserts in vitro. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012; 41 (11) 1338-1343
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Horton JE, Tarpley Jr TM, Wood LD. The healing of surgical defects in alveolar bone produced with ultrasonic instrumentation, chisel, and rotary bur. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1975; 39 (04) 536-546
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Reside J, Everett E, Padilla R. et al. In vivo assessment of bone healing following Piezotome® ultrasonic instrumentation. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015; 17 (02) 384-394
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Mirza AA, Alandejani TA, Al-Sayed AA. Piezosurgery versus conventional osteotomy in rhinoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Laryngoscope 2020; 130 (05) 1158-1165
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Zoumalan RA, Shah AR, Constantinides M. Quantitative comparison between microperforating osteotomies and continuous lateral osteotomies in rhinoplasty. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2010; 12 (02) 92-96
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar