Search

Preservation rhinoplasty encompasses a number of techniques that minimize disruption of the native cartilaginous and soft tissue nasal architecture. These techniques have gained popularity resulting in an increase in publications relevant to preservation rhinoplasty. However, many studies that present patient outcomes are of low-level evidence and do not incorporate validated patient-reported outcome measures. While these studies do consistently report positive outcomes, there are few high-level comparative studies that support the theoretical benefits of preservation relative to structural rhinoplasty. As contemporary preservation rhinoplasty techniques will continue to evolve and become incorporated into clinical practice, there will be the need for parallel emphasis on robust clinical studies to delineate the value of these methods.

Classic Joseph hump reduction techniques have been a hallmark of current rhinoplasty practice and teaching. Recently, there has been a renewed global interest in preservation rhinoplasty techniques, although these techniques are not new. The work and techniques of innovative surgeons including Goodale, Lothrop, and Cottle describing preservation concepts from the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century were not as prevalently adopted as open structural approaches. As such, there has been a relative paucity in both research and teaching of preservation techniques—particularly in the United States. A survey of members of the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and The Rhinoplasty Society (145 respondents) demonstrates that while 15 (10%) of surgeons are not at all familiar with dorsal preservation surgery, 130 (90%) were. In the group that was familiar with dorsal preservation, the majority were only somewhat familiar (84, 65%) with these techniques. Only 11 respondents received any formal training in dorsal preservation techniques during residency or fellowship. 61 (42%) had attended a course or conference in which dorsal preservation techniques were discussed. One-hundred twenty-two survey respondents (84.1%) do not currently implement preservation techniques into their rhinoplasty practice. Twelve (8%) respondents implement it in 50% of cases. As research and formal training in preservation rhinoplasty grow, familiarity and implementation of these techniques will likely also grow in the United States.

Reconstructive procedures in the head and neck can be a surgical challenge owing to the complex anatomical and physiological structure. Different locoregional and microvascular flaps are used for various defects to improve both function and cosmesis. Subjective clinical findings have been the mainstay for perfusion monitoring; however, areas of borderline perfusion are much more difficult to assess clinically. Multiple technologies that offer objective perfusion assessment have been developed to improve surgical outcomes. Indocyanine green (ICG) angiography has gained popularity owing to its minimal invasiveness and increased sensitivity and specificity in assessing flap perfusion particularly in the head and neck. It has been extensively used in free flaps, pedicled flaps (including nasal reconstruction), facelift procedures, random flaps, skull base reconstruction, and pharyngocutaneous fistula prediction. Its perioperative use has provided valuable qualitative and quantitative data that aid our understanding of flap hemodynamics. Clinically, this impacted decision-making in flap design, harvest, inset, and precocious salvage interventions. Though increased cost and intraoperative time could be limitations, cost-effectiveness studies have supported its use, particularly in high-risk individuals. Limitations include the lack of standardized dosing and consistent methodology agreement for data analysis. Future studies should involve larger cohorts and multi-institute studies to overcome such limitations.

Nasal obstruction is a common presenting symptom of patients seen by primary care physicians, otolaryngologists, and facial plastic surgeons. A variety of treatment strategies, both surgical and nonsurgical, have been used with success in improving nasal obstruction and quality of life. In a subset of patients, many of whom have either attempted these common treatment strategies or are intolerant of them, nasal obstruction remains a significant symptom. In these patients, there may be an identifiable problem, but it is simply not repairable or there is no identifiable anatomic issue. The management of these patients is discussed in this article, with an emphasis on a sensitive approach that takes into consideration a patient's mental health. While the need for diagnostic testing is generally not necessary for most cases of nasal obstruction, endoscopy and imaging should be considered in these patients. Validated patient-reported outcome measures are particularly helpful in providing an objective measure to a patient's frustrating symptoms. A variety of medications can be either contributory to the patient's symptoms or therapeutic if used appropriately. A variety of surgical interventions can also result in a functionally crippled nose and diagnoses including nasal valve stenosis, septal perforations, and empty nose syndrome are discussed. Importantly, further surgical interventions may not be appropriate if a deformity is minimal, and a surgeon should resist the temptation to proceed with surgery in those situations.