Cargando…

Postoperative Fillers Reduce Revision Rates in Rhinoplasty

BACKGROUND: Rhinoplasty is a complex procedure with revision rates of up to 17%. Even minor imperfections after surgery can be significant. OBJECTIVES: This review aims to investigate the use of hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers postaesthetic rhinoplasty and assess the rhinoplasty practice of the senior...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Khan, Maria, Sankar, Thangasamy, Shoaib, Taimur
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10111282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37082333
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/asjof/ojad029
_version_ 1785027420541157376
author Khan, Maria
Sankar, Thangasamy
Shoaib, Taimur
author_facet Khan, Maria
Sankar, Thangasamy
Shoaib, Taimur
author_sort Khan, Maria
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Rhinoplasty is a complex procedure with revision rates of up to 17%. Even minor imperfections after surgery can be significant. OBJECTIVES: This review aims to investigate the use of hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers postaesthetic rhinoplasty and assess the rhinoplasty practice of the senior author. METHODS: From the senior author’s practice, case records were obtained for patients who underwent surgery followed by nonsurgical rhinoplasty between 2015 and 2022. Data were retrospectively obtained and analyzed. The variables measured included the number of patients treated with fillers postoperatively, volume and type of filler used, locations of injection, and frequency of injections and complications. RESULTS: Eight hundred patients underwent rhinoplasty between March 2015 and March 2022, and 10.6% (n = 85) of these underwent nonsurgical rhinoplasty using the HA filler for postoperative imperfections. The Juvederm 2 filler (Allergan, Irvine, CA) was mainly used with a mean volume of 0.2 mL. A total of 11.8% (n = 10) of patients had fillers for a second time and 3.5% (n = 3) required a third filler. The majority of patients had fillers in the rhinon area (82.3%; n = 70), and no complications were reported, with patient satisfaction levels being good. CONCLUSIONS: Often, there is hesitancy to use fillers after surgery due to the assumption that fillers will be required in the long term and complication rates can be high for postrhinoplasty nose fillers. From our series, we conclude that after surgery, fillers last for a greater time period than those used purely for primary augmentation. Hence, the authors recommend rhinoplasty surgeons to consider HA filler use for patients troubled by postsurgery surface irregularities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5: [Image: see text]
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10111282
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101112822023-04-19 Postoperative Fillers Reduce Revision Rates in Rhinoplasty Khan, Maria Sankar, Thangasamy Shoaib, Taimur Aesthet Surg J Open Forum Original Article BACKGROUND: Rhinoplasty is a complex procedure with revision rates of up to 17%. Even minor imperfections after surgery can be significant. OBJECTIVES: This review aims to investigate the use of hyaluronic acid (HA) fillers postaesthetic rhinoplasty and assess the rhinoplasty practice of the senior author. METHODS: From the senior author’s practice, case records were obtained for patients who underwent surgery followed by nonsurgical rhinoplasty between 2015 and 2022. Data were retrospectively obtained and analyzed. The variables measured included the number of patients treated with fillers postoperatively, volume and type of filler used, locations of injection, and frequency of injections and complications. RESULTS: Eight hundred patients underwent rhinoplasty between March 2015 and March 2022, and 10.6% (n = 85) of these underwent nonsurgical rhinoplasty using the HA filler for postoperative imperfections. The Juvederm 2 filler (Allergan, Irvine, CA) was mainly used with a mean volume of 0.2 mL. A total of 11.8% (n = 10) of patients had fillers for a second time and 3.5% (n = 3) required a third filler. The majority of patients had fillers in the rhinon area (82.3%; n = 70), and no complications were reported, with patient satisfaction levels being good. CONCLUSIONS: Often, there is hesitancy to use fillers after surgery due to the assumption that fillers will be required in the long term and complication rates can be high for postrhinoplasty nose fillers. From our series, we conclude that after surgery, fillers last for a greater time period than those used purely for primary augmentation. Hence, the authors recommend rhinoplasty surgeons to consider HA filler use for patients troubled by postsurgery surface irregularities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5: [Image: see text] Oxford University Press 2023-03-22 /pmc/articles/PMC10111282/ /pubmed/37082333 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/asjof/ojad029 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Aesthetic Society. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Khan, Maria
Sankar, Thangasamy
Shoaib, Taimur
Postoperative Fillers Reduce Revision Rates in Rhinoplasty
title Postoperative Fillers Reduce Revision Rates in Rhinoplasty
title_full Postoperative Fillers Reduce Revision Rates in Rhinoplasty
title_fullStr Postoperative Fillers Reduce Revision Rates in Rhinoplasty
title_full_unstemmed Postoperative Fillers Reduce Revision Rates in Rhinoplasty
title_short Postoperative Fillers Reduce Revision Rates in Rhinoplasty
title_sort postoperative fillers reduce revision rates in rhinoplasty
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10111282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37082333
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/asjof/ojad029
work_keys_str_mv AT khanmaria postoperativefillersreducerevisionratesinrhinoplasty
AT sankarthangasamy postoperativefillersreducerevisionratesinrhinoplasty
AT shoaibtaimur postoperativefillersreducerevisionratesinrhinoplasty