Download PDF
Facial Plast Surg 2014; 30(02): 103-112
DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1371903
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Dichotomy of Rhinoplasty Practice: From the Conference Floor to the Operating Room

Pietro Palma
1   The Face Clinic, Milan, Italy
2   Department of ORL/HNS, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy
,
Iman Khodaei
3   Department of ORL/HNS, Mehregan Clinic, Karaj, Iran
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
08 May 2014 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Advancements in surgical techniques and improvements in clinical practice inevitably lag behind scientific progress and peer-led opinion. The rapid rise and fall in the popularity of rhinoplasty techniques makes scientific evidence-gathering and education a daunting task. Students of rhinoplasty face a long and steep learning curve, and need to acquire sound analytical tools to critically evaluate both literature contributions and operative reports shown in conferences. Such a complex learning process requires continuous self-examination, and must account for the increasingly sophisticated and intricate wishes of rhinoplasty patients whose desires do not always coincide with what surgeons have been taught and practiced. In contemporary practice, the developing rhinoplasty surgeon must be also familiar with the range of racial features, as the broad variety of nasal anatomies and beauty canons are truly staggering, and one formula does not fit all cases.

The complex set of circumstances that lead to disharmony between scientific progress and clinical practice is addressed, and a utilitarian plan to remedy this awkward dichotomy is suggested.

Keywords

rhinoplasty education - evidence-based rhinoplasty - rhinoplasty techniques
 

  • References

  • 1 Gubisch W. Extracorporeal septoplasty for the markedly deviated septum. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2005; 7 (4) 218-226
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Gunter JP. Facial analysis for the rhinoplasty patient. In: 12th Annual Dallas Rhinoplasty Symposium. Dallas, TX: Southwestern Medical Center; 1995: 17-27
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Toriumi DM. New concepts in nasal tip contouring. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2006; 8 (3) 156-185
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Tardy Jr ME. Rhinoplasty: The Art and the Science. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders Company; 1997
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Perkins S, Patel A. Endonasal suture techniques in tip rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2009; 17 (1) 41-54 , vi
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Daniel RK. Mastering Rhinoplasty. Berlin Heidelberg, Germany: Springer-Verlag; 2010
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Dayan S, Kanodia R. Has the pendulum swung too far?: trends in the teaching of endonasal rhinoplasty. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2009; 11 (6) 414-416
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Pastorek N, Ham J. The underprojecting nasal tip: an endonasal approach. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2004; 12 (1) 93-106
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Kridel RW, Scott BA, Foda HM. The tongue-in-groove technique in septorhinoplasty. A 10-year experience. Arch Facial Plast Surg 1999; 1 (4) 246-256 , discussion 257–258
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Palma P, Khodaei I. Why do I favour the endonasal approach?. B-ENT 2010; 6 (Suppl. 15) 25-33
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Nolst Trenité GJ. Rhinoplasty: A Practical Guide to Functional and Aesthetic Surgery of the Nose. The Hague, The Netherlands: Kugler Publications; 2010
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Robin JL. Extramucosal method in rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1979; 3 (1) 171-178
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Palma P, Khodaei I, Tasman A-J. A guide to the assessment and analysis of the rhinoplasty patient. Facial Plast Surg 2011; 27 (2) 146-159
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Powell N, Humphreys B. Proportions of the Aesthetic Face. New York, NY: Thieme Stratton Inc.; 1984
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Agarwal A, Gracely E, Silver WE. Realistic expectations: to morph or not to morph?. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007; 119 (4) 1343-1351 , discussion 1352–1353
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Gunter JP. The merits of the open approach in rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997; 99 (3) 863-867
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Simons RL. A personal report: emphasizing the endonasal approach. Facial Plast Surg Clin N Am 2004; 12 (1) 15-34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Perkins SW. The evolution of the combined use of endonasal and external columellar approaches to rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2004; 12 (1) 35-50
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Palma P, Khodaei I. Hybrid rhinoplasty: The 21st century approach to remodeling the nose. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2010; 12 (6) 412-414
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Sheen JH, Sheen AP. Aesthetic Rhinoplasty. 2nd ed. St. Louis, MO: Quality Medical Publishing; 1998
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Rohrich RJ. Streamlining cosmetic surgery patient selection—just say no!. Plast Reconstr Surg 1999; 104 (1) 220-221
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Constantian Mark B. Rhinoplasty: Craft & Magic. St. Louis, MO: Quality Medical Publishing; 2009
    Google Scholar