Surgical outcomes of primary and revision augmentation rhinoplasty using a processed fascia lata

Yoo Suk Kim, Do Yang Park, Dong Hyun Shin, Seok Min Yang, Sang Yeob Seong, Joo Heon Yoon, Chang-Hoon Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Dorsal augmentation is the most commonly performed procedure in rhinoplasty for Asian patients. Due to the anatomic features of the Asian nose, the use of nonautologous materials to obtain a proper degree of augmentation is inevitable in most cases. Because the use of nonautologous materials possesses a higher risk of complications, surgeons are concerned about selecting suitable materials for the procedure, especially in revision rhinoplasty. Therefore, this study was designed to evaluate the suitability and usefulness of a homologous material, Tutoplast-processed fascia lata (TPFL), in revision augmentation rhinoplasty. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 104 rhinoplasty patients (primary, 86; revision, 18) who had undergone dorsal augmentation using TPFL was conducted. The comparison of surgical outcomes between primary and revision surgery was made using objective [dorsal height (DH) and radix height (RH), complication rate] and subjective (patient satisfaction) parameters. Results: The degree of augmentation represented by DH and RH was comparable between primary and revision rhinoplasty using TPFL. In comparing the rate of postoperative complications, only minor incidents were noted, in six cases after primary surgery and in one case after revision surgery. Patient satisfaction was measured in both primary and revision augmentation, with a significant difference observed between the two groups (40.57 ± 9.25 versus 31.48 ± 7.59; p < 0.05). Conclusion: TPFL is a feasible implant material that delivers suitable augmentation and patient satisfaction with minimal morbidity in both primary and revision rhinoplasty.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)141-144
Number of pages4
JournalAmerican Journal of Rhinology and Allergy
Volume29
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015 Mar 1

Fingerprint

Fascia Lata
Rhinoplasty
Patient Satisfaction
Reoperation
Nose
Morbidity
Tutoplast

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Immunology and Allergy
  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Kim, Yoo Suk ; Park, Do Yang ; Shin, Dong Hyun ; Yang, Seok Min ; Seong, Sang Yeob ; Yoon, Joo Heon ; Kim, Chang-Hoon. / Surgical outcomes of primary and revision augmentation rhinoplasty using a processed fascia lata. In: American Journal of Rhinology and Allergy. 2015 ; Vol. 29, No. 2. pp. 141-144.
@article{a309e347beed41599c827854371038c2,
title = "Surgical outcomes of primary and revision augmentation rhinoplasty using a processed fascia lata",
abstract = "Background: Dorsal augmentation is the most commonly performed procedure in rhinoplasty for Asian patients. Due to the anatomic features of the Asian nose, the use of nonautologous materials to obtain a proper degree of augmentation is inevitable in most cases. Because the use of nonautologous materials possesses a higher risk of complications, surgeons are concerned about selecting suitable materials for the procedure, especially in revision rhinoplasty. Therefore, this study was designed to evaluate the suitability and usefulness of a homologous material, Tutoplast-processed fascia lata (TPFL), in revision augmentation rhinoplasty. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 104 rhinoplasty patients (primary, 86; revision, 18) who had undergone dorsal augmentation using TPFL was conducted. The comparison of surgical outcomes between primary and revision surgery was made using objective [dorsal height (DH) and radix height (RH), complication rate] and subjective (patient satisfaction) parameters. Results: The degree of augmentation represented by DH and RH was comparable between primary and revision rhinoplasty using TPFL. In comparing the rate of postoperative complications, only minor incidents were noted, in six cases after primary surgery and in one case after revision surgery. Patient satisfaction was measured in both primary and revision augmentation, with a significant difference observed between the two groups (40.57 ± 9.25 versus 31.48 ± 7.59; p < 0.05). Conclusion: TPFL is a feasible implant material that delivers suitable augmentation and patient satisfaction with minimal morbidity in both primary and revision rhinoplasty.",
author = "Kim, {Yoo Suk} and Park, {Do Yang} and Shin, {Dong Hyun} and Yang, {Seok Min} and Seong, {Sang Yeob} and Yoon, {Joo Heon} and Chang-Hoon Kim",
year = "2015",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.2500/ajra.2015.29.4138",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "141--144",
journal = "American Journal of Rhinology and Allergy",
issn = "1945-8924",
publisher = "OceanSide Publications Inc.",
number = "2",

}

Surgical outcomes of primary and revision augmentation rhinoplasty using a processed fascia lata. / Kim, Yoo Suk; Park, Do Yang; Shin, Dong Hyun; Yang, Seok Min; Seong, Sang Yeob; Yoon, Joo Heon; Kim, Chang-Hoon.

In: American Journal of Rhinology and Allergy, Vol. 29, No. 2, 01.03.2015, p. 141-144.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Surgical outcomes of primary and revision augmentation rhinoplasty using a processed fascia lata

AU - Kim, Yoo Suk

AU - Park, Do Yang

AU - Shin, Dong Hyun

AU - Yang, Seok Min

AU - Seong, Sang Yeob

AU - Yoon, Joo Heon

AU - Kim, Chang-Hoon

PY - 2015/3/1

Y1 - 2015/3/1

N2 - Background: Dorsal augmentation is the most commonly performed procedure in rhinoplasty for Asian patients. Due to the anatomic features of the Asian nose, the use of nonautologous materials to obtain a proper degree of augmentation is inevitable in most cases. Because the use of nonautologous materials possesses a higher risk of complications, surgeons are concerned about selecting suitable materials for the procedure, especially in revision rhinoplasty. Therefore, this study was designed to evaluate the suitability and usefulness of a homologous material, Tutoplast-processed fascia lata (TPFL), in revision augmentation rhinoplasty. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 104 rhinoplasty patients (primary, 86; revision, 18) who had undergone dorsal augmentation using TPFL was conducted. The comparison of surgical outcomes between primary and revision surgery was made using objective [dorsal height (DH) and radix height (RH), complication rate] and subjective (patient satisfaction) parameters. Results: The degree of augmentation represented by DH and RH was comparable between primary and revision rhinoplasty using TPFL. In comparing the rate of postoperative complications, only minor incidents were noted, in six cases after primary surgery and in one case after revision surgery. Patient satisfaction was measured in both primary and revision augmentation, with a significant difference observed between the two groups (40.57 ± 9.25 versus 31.48 ± 7.59; p < 0.05). Conclusion: TPFL is a feasible implant material that delivers suitable augmentation and patient satisfaction with minimal morbidity in both primary and revision rhinoplasty.

AB - Background: Dorsal augmentation is the most commonly performed procedure in rhinoplasty for Asian patients. Due to the anatomic features of the Asian nose, the use of nonautologous materials to obtain a proper degree of augmentation is inevitable in most cases. Because the use of nonautologous materials possesses a higher risk of complications, surgeons are concerned about selecting suitable materials for the procedure, especially in revision rhinoplasty. Therefore, this study was designed to evaluate the suitability and usefulness of a homologous material, Tutoplast-processed fascia lata (TPFL), in revision augmentation rhinoplasty. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 104 rhinoplasty patients (primary, 86; revision, 18) who had undergone dorsal augmentation using TPFL was conducted. The comparison of surgical outcomes between primary and revision surgery was made using objective [dorsal height (DH) and radix height (RH), complication rate] and subjective (patient satisfaction) parameters. Results: The degree of augmentation represented by DH and RH was comparable between primary and revision rhinoplasty using TPFL. In comparing the rate of postoperative complications, only minor incidents were noted, in six cases after primary surgery and in one case after revision surgery. Patient satisfaction was measured in both primary and revision augmentation, with a significant difference observed between the two groups (40.57 ± 9.25 versus 31.48 ± 7.59; p < 0.05). Conclusion: TPFL is a feasible implant material that delivers suitable augmentation and patient satisfaction with minimal morbidity in both primary and revision rhinoplasty.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84925736329&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84925736329&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2500/ajra.2015.29.4138

DO - 10.2500/ajra.2015.29.4138

M3 - Article

C2 - 25785756

AN - SCOPUS:84925736329

VL - 29

SP - 141

EP - 144

JO - American Journal of Rhinology and Allergy

JF - American Journal of Rhinology and Allergy

SN - 1945-8924

IS - 2

ER -