Cargando…

Outcomes of Closed versus Open Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review

Open and closed rhinoplasty are two main approaches to perform nasal modifications. According to current literature, there is no current consensus among plastic surgeons and otolaryngologists on which technique is preferred in terms of aesthetic result, complications, and patient satisfaction. This...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gupta, Rohun, John, Jithin, Ranganathan, Noopur, Stepanian, Rima, Gupta, Monik, Hart, Justin, Nossoni, Farideddin, Shaheen, Kenneth, Folbe, Adam, Chaiyasate, Kongkrit
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc. 2022
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9507448/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36159386
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1756315
_version_ 1784796867413934080
author Gupta, Rohun
John, Jithin
Ranganathan, Noopur
Stepanian, Rima
Gupta, Monik
Hart, Justin
Nossoni, Farideddin
Shaheen, Kenneth
Folbe, Adam
Chaiyasate, Kongkrit
author_facet Gupta, Rohun
John, Jithin
Ranganathan, Noopur
Stepanian, Rima
Gupta, Monik
Hart, Justin
Nossoni, Farideddin
Shaheen, Kenneth
Folbe, Adam
Chaiyasate, Kongkrit
author_sort Gupta, Rohun
collection PubMed
description Open and closed rhinoplasty are two main approaches to perform nasal modifications. According to current literature, there is no current consensus among plastic surgeons and otolaryngologists on which technique is preferred in terms of aesthetic result, complications, and patient satisfaction. This study uses published research to determine whether open or closed rhinoplasty leads to superior patient outcomes. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for systematic reviews were followed and a literature search was conducted in four databases based on our search strategy. Articles were then imported into COVIDENCE where they underwent primary screening and full-text review. Twenty articles were selected in this study after 243 articles were screened. There were 4 case series, 12 retrospective cohort studies, 1 prospective cohort study, 1 case–control, and 2 outcomes research. There were three cosmetic studies, eight functional studies, and nine studies that included both cosmetic and functional components. Sixteen studies utilized both open and closed rhinoplasty and four utilized open rhinoplasty. Both techniques demonstrated high patient and provider satisfaction and no advantage was found between techniques. Based on available studies, we cannot conclude if there is a preference between open or closed rhinoplasty in terms of which technique leads to better patient outcomes. Several studies determined that open rhinoplasty and closed rhinoplasty leads to comparative patient satisfaction. To make outcome reporting more reliable and uniform among studies, authors should look to utilize the Nasal Obstruction and Septoplasty Effectiveness scale and the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9507448
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95074482022-09-24 Outcomes of Closed versus Open Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review Gupta, Rohun John, Jithin Ranganathan, Noopur Stepanian, Rima Gupta, Monik Hart, Justin Nossoni, Farideddin Shaheen, Kenneth Folbe, Adam Chaiyasate, Kongkrit Arch Plast Surg Open and closed rhinoplasty are two main approaches to perform nasal modifications. According to current literature, there is no current consensus among plastic surgeons and otolaryngologists on which technique is preferred in terms of aesthetic result, complications, and patient satisfaction. This study uses published research to determine whether open or closed rhinoplasty leads to superior patient outcomes. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for systematic reviews were followed and a literature search was conducted in four databases based on our search strategy. Articles were then imported into COVIDENCE where they underwent primary screening and full-text review. Twenty articles were selected in this study after 243 articles were screened. There were 4 case series, 12 retrospective cohort studies, 1 prospective cohort study, 1 case–control, and 2 outcomes research. There were three cosmetic studies, eight functional studies, and nine studies that included both cosmetic and functional components. Sixteen studies utilized both open and closed rhinoplasty and four utilized open rhinoplasty. Both techniques demonstrated high patient and provider satisfaction and no advantage was found between techniques. Based on available studies, we cannot conclude if there is a preference between open or closed rhinoplasty in terms of which technique leads to better patient outcomes. Several studies determined that open rhinoplasty and closed rhinoplasty leads to comparative patient satisfaction. To make outcome reporting more reliable and uniform among studies, authors should look to utilize the Nasal Obstruction and Septoplasty Effectiveness scale and the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation. Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc. 2022-09-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9507448/ /pubmed/36159386 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1756315 Text en The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Gupta, Rohun
John, Jithin
Ranganathan, Noopur
Stepanian, Rima
Gupta, Monik
Hart, Justin
Nossoni, Farideddin
Shaheen, Kenneth
Folbe, Adam
Chaiyasate, Kongkrit
Outcomes of Closed versus Open Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review
title Outcomes of Closed versus Open Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review
title_full Outcomes of Closed versus Open Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review
title_fullStr Outcomes of Closed versus Open Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Outcomes of Closed versus Open Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review
title_short Outcomes of Closed versus Open Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review
title_sort outcomes of closed versus open rhinoplasty: a systematic review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9507448/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36159386
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1756315
work_keys_str_mv AT guptarohun outcomesofclosedversusopenrhinoplastyasystematicreview
AT johnjithin outcomesofclosedversusopenrhinoplastyasystematicreview
AT ranganathannoopur outcomesofclosedversusopenrhinoplastyasystematicreview
AT stepanianrima outcomesofclosedversusopenrhinoplastyasystematicreview
AT guptamonik outcomesofclosedversusopenrhinoplastyasystematicreview
AT hartjustin outcomesofclosedversusopenrhinoplastyasystematicreview
AT nossonifarideddin outcomesofclosedversusopenrhinoplastyasystematicreview
AT shaheenkenneth outcomesofclosedversusopenrhinoplastyasystematicreview
AT folbeadam outcomesofclosedversusopenrhinoplastyasystematicreview
AT chaiyasatekongkrit outcomesofclosedversusopenrhinoplastyasystematicreview