Search

Impairment of nasal breathing is a highly prevalent and bothersome symptom that affects daily functioning and/or sleep quality. Those surgeons dealing with patients seeking rhinoplasty need to carefully analyze the preoperative nasal breathing capacity and predict the positive or even negative impact of rhino(septo)plasty on nasal breathing. Given the lack of correlation between the subjective feeling of suboptimal nasal breathing and the objective measurements of nasal flow and nasal resistance, a critical and mainly clinical evaluation of all anatomical, mucosal, and sensory mechanisms involved in nasal obstruction is mandatory. Indeed, thermo-, mechano-, and chemosensory receptors on the nasal mucosa, airflow, and respiratory dynamics might all contribute to the overall perception of nasal breathing capacity. In this review, we provide an overview of the factors determining suboptimal nasal breathing including different diagnostic and experimental tests that can be performed to evaluate nasal flow and nasal resistance and current limitations in our understanding of the problem of nasal breathing in an individual patient. An algorithm for the preoperative or diagnostic workup for nasal obstruction is included that might be useful as a guide for clinicians dealing with patients seeking nose surgery., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background: To date, research on preoperative patient selection has mainly focused on patient personality, with body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) being the most studied. Despite the many reasons for not planning a rhinoplasty, no data are available on the nature of these reasons. Our aim is to conduct a multicentre international observational study on the reasons for rejection of patients seeking rhinoplasty in 5 tertiary rhinoplasty care centres., Methods: Surgeons documented the reasons for not scheduling a rhinoplasty in consecutive patients who consulted them between January 2021 and March 2022 using a predefined list of reasons for rejection. Surgeons were also asked to report on the patient attitudes after rejection, and about the advice given to patients in the event of refusal., Results: 186 patients seeking rhinoplasty were included. Multiple reasons for rejection were present in 76% of patients, with a mean of 2.9 reasons for rejection per patient. Overall, patient-related factors were most frequently associated with rejection (64.3%), followed by nose-related factors (28.4%), surgeon-related factors (6.0 %) and surgery-related factors (1.3%). The presence of severe BDD symptoms was reported in only 11.3% of the rejected patients. Patients rejected for rhinoplasty were advised to reconsider the surgery (32.8 %) and/or were referred to another surgeon (32.8%). No further action was taken in 39.8% of the patients. Of the patients who were rejected, most had a neutral (39.2 %) or positive (37.1 %) attitude in relation to the lack of rhinoplasty planning., Conclusion: This study highlights the variety of reasons for which patients seeking rhinoplasty are not considered good candidates for a rhinoplasty, with patient-related factors being more prevalent than nose-related and other factors. Increasing awareness on the impact of adequate patient selection for rhinoplasty may contribute to better outcomes in rhinoplasty.

Rhinoplasty is uniquely suited to capitalize on different aspects of three-dimensional (3D) modeling technology. Currently, 3D surface imaging of preoperative and postoperative nasal structure provides a platform for better surgical planning and patient counselling as well as objective postoperative measurements. Physical nasal models using 3D printing technology can improve rhinoplasty performance intraoperatively, postoperative outcomes, together with nasal prosthetic manufacture, by tailoring to specific patient anatomy. Advances in tissue engineering using 3D-printed biocompatible scaffolds have shown excellent nasal cartilage mimicry and hold promise for increasingly versatile directed tissue regeneration in rhinoplasty and nasal reconstructive surgery. As health care innovations are expected to become increasingly common in standard rhinoplasty practices in the future, we give an account of how 3D technologies can create new opportunities to optimize surgical planning and improve overall the patient experience., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

With no consensus document or guideline to help us compute the psychological make-up of rhinoplasty candidates and in the light of new perspectives of some key opinion leaders in the field of patient selection, the goals of this article are to offer a glimpse of the current literature together with the knowledge gaps, introduce some new tools for the preoperative consultation, help us identify who among our patients is at greatest risk for a poor outcome, and explain how childhood trauma can be linked to body shame and postoperative dissatisfaction., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Despite the recognized value of morphing in the literature, this preoperative tool has never been studied in the context of selection process in rhinoplasty. The main purpose of this article is to identify the use of morphing as a filter for unsuitable patients, the attrition rate from the initial consultation to surgery, and whether patients' appreciation on morphing influence their decision-making process. Three-hundred thirty-four consecutive patients, seeking rhinoplasty, underwent two-dimensional computer imaging and completed a 14-question survey about their opinion on morphing. Based on the presence or absence of patient/physician consensus on the expected outcomes during simulation, patients were divided into accepted or rejected candidates for surgery. Accepted candidates were scheduled for rhinoplasty and subdivided into those who underwent surgery, those who postponed their surgery (static), and those who cancelled their procedure. Their responses to the survey were compared between different patients' categories. Forty-four patients (13.2%) were rejected for rhinoplasty since consensus was not achieved during morphing. From 290 accepted patients, 178 underwent their operation (53.3%), 74 patients (22.1%) postponed their rhinoplasty, and 38 (11.4%) cancelled their surgery. Fifty-seven percent of rejected patients and 42% of the static group were not satisfied with the proposed results of morphing, in contrast with 16% of the operated group. Sixty-four percent of rejected patients, and 47% of the static group were not reassured after morphing, compared with 26% of the operated group. Presence or absence of consensus during morphing can guide the surgeon regarding a given patients' suitability for surgery. Patient satisfaction and reassurance with the morphed images can be a good predictor of patients who will proceed to surgery, calling attention to the value of morphing as a selection tool for surgeons and patients alike., Competing Interests: Dr. Hellings reports grants and personal fees from Mylan, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Sanofi, Allergopharma, and Stallergenes, outside the submitted work. All the other authors report no conflict of interest., (Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.)

Objectives/hypothesis: To validate a new screening tool for body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) in patients seeking aesthetic rhinoplasty., Study Design: We performed a prospective instrument validation study in an academic rhinology clinic., Methods: The Body Dysmorphic Disorder Questionnaire-Aesthetic Surgery (BDDQ-AS) is a seven-item short questionnaire validated in 116 patients undergoing aesthetic rhinoplasty. Screening was positive if the patient acknowledged on the BDDQ-AS that he/she was concerned about their appearance (question 1 = yes) AND preoccupied with these concerns (question 2 = yes) AND that these concerns caused at least moderate distress or impairment in different domains of daily life (question 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 ≥ 3 or question 7 = yes). Construct validity was assessed by comparing the BDDQ-AS to the Sheehan Disability Scale and the Derriford Appearance Scale-59. To determine concurrent validity, the BDDQ-AS was compared to the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale Modified for BDD. Finally, the predictive value of the BDDQ-AS on satisfaction 12 months after rhinoplasty was evaluated using a visual analogue scale and the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation., Results: Reliability of the BDDQ-AS was adequate, with Cronbach alpha = .83 for rhinoplasty patients and .84 for controls. Sensitivity was 89.6% and specificity 81.4%. BDDQ-AS-positive patients (n = 55) were more impaired in daily life and experienced more appearance-related distress and dysfunction compared to BDDQ-AS-negative patients. Moreover, they had more severe BDD symptoms. Finally, BDDQ-AS-positive patients were less satisfied after surgery compared to BDDQ-AS-negative patients., Conclusions: We hereby validated a new screening tool for BDD in an aesthetic rhinoplasty population., Level of Evidence: 3b. Laryngoscope, 126:1739-1745, 2016., (© 2016 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

During the preoperative assessment in rhinoplasty, the surgeon takes a thorough history, performs a complete examination by assessing functional and aesthetic aspects of the nose, obtains a clear understanding of the patient's wishes, conducts facial analysis based on standardized photography, and communicates to the patient the goals and pitfalls of surgery. Computer imaging or morphing of the preoperative pictures of the nose has drawn a lot of interest in the last decade, and it is a sign of evolution of the preoperative consultation. Technological advances, also in the context of rhinoplasty, have led to the development of three-dimensional (3D) imaging techniques, and have completely revolutionized the way that surgeons manage their patients preoperatively and evaluate postoperative results today. The accurate 3D surface imaging aids the surgeon to communicate with the patient adequately before surgery, to set an appropriate surgical plan, and to measure the shape and volume changes of the patient's nose that result from the intervention. The present review provides an analysis on the current knowledge of 3D surface imaging in rhinoplasty derived from the literature, and highlights future directions of preoperative and postoperative assessment in the field., (Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.)

The preoperative consultation in rhinoplasty involves a multitude of actions that are mandatory for the decision-making process: history taking with attention to the symptoms and specific requests of the patient, clinical evaluation of the aesthetics, the functional status of the nose and the patients' motivation for surgery, and acquisition of standardized preoperative photographs. During the last decade, computer imaging or morphing of the preoperative pictures of the nose has become much more common. This part of the consultation allows the surgeon and patient to reach a mutually agreeable set of expectations by demonstrating the planned outcome of rhinoplasty and describing the objectives of surgery. The evolving literature on computer imaging supports that the benefits for both the patients and surgeons seem to outweigh the risks. Indeed, morphing enables the surgeon to precisely explain to the patients the goal of surgery, and to postpone or even cancel surgery in the group of patients that do not appear satisfied with the proposed changes. In addition, patients may feel more prepared for surgery and have a more realistic view of the outcome of the intervention. Presently, computer imaging is progressing from 2D to 3D models, optimizing the surgeons' capacity to perform morphing in the most advantageous manner for both parties. The current review provides a state-of-the art analysis on morphing in rhinoplasty, putting morphing into a historic and relevant perspective in clinical practice., (Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.)

Background: Rhinoplasty is one of the most challenging facial plastic procedures. Although patient satisfaction is the real outcome parameter in rhinoplasty, most authors have studied objective outcomes evaluated by professionals. The purpose of this study was to determine patient satisfaction after rhinoplasty in patients born with a cleft lip compared with outcome assessment by professionals, and to assess the impact of the procedure on appearance-related distress and generic quality of life., Methods: Patient evaluation of the nose was performed before and 1 year after secondary cleft rhinoplasty (n = 33) using a visual analogue scale for nasal function and shape, and the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation. General sinonasal complaints were evaluated using the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test. Appearance-related psychological distress was measured using the Derriford Appearance Scale. The Sheehan Disability Scale evaluated quality of life. Aesthetic outcome was evaluated by scoring of preoperative and postoperative photographs by two independent surgeons., Results: One year postoperatively, patients showed significantly higher visual analogue scale scores for nasal shape (p < 0.0001) and function (p = 0.005) and higher Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (p < 0.0001) scores. Correspondingly, Sino-Nasal Outcome Test scores were lower (p = 0.006). The appearance-related psychological distress was lower (p < 0.0001), and the generic quality of life was increased after rhinoplasty (p = 0.01). No correlation was found between patient outcome evaluation and surgeons' scores., Conclusion: There is high patient satisfaction at 12 months after secondary cleft rhinoplasty, resulting in a significant improvement of self-esteem and generic quality of life.

Background: In patients seeking aesthetic rhinoplasty, a high prevalence of body dysmorphic disorder symptoms has recently been reported. However, the impact of these symptoms on the outcomes after rhinoplasty remains elusive. This large-scale study determines the influence of preoperative body dysmorphic disorder symptoms on patients' postoperative satisfaction and quality of life, using validated questionnaires., Methods: A 1-year prospective study of 166 adult patients undergoing cosmetic rhinoplasty in a tertiary referral center was performed. Severity of body dysmorphic disorder symptoms was assessed by the modified Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale. Postoperative satisfaction was evaluated using a visual analog scale for patients' appraisal of nasal shape and the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation. Generic quality of life was quantified by the Sheehan Disability Scale, whereas the appearance-related disruption of everyday life was measured by the Derriford Appearance Scale-59., Results: Preoperative body dysmorphic disorder symptom scores inversely correlated with postoperative satisfaction at 3 months (visual analog scale nasal shape: rho = -0.43, p < 0.001; Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation: rho = -0.48, p < 0.001) and 12 months (rho = -0.40, p < 0.001; and rho = -0.41, p < 0.001, respectively) after surgery. In addition, body dysmorphic disorder symptom scores positively correlated with Sheehan Disability Scale scores and Derriford Appearance Scale-59 scores at 3 months (rho = 0.43, p < 0.001 and rho = 0.48, p < 0.001, respectively) and 12 months (rho = 0.32, p < 0.001, and rho = 0.48, p < 0.001, respectively) postoperatively., Conclusion: This study provides the first evidence of the negative impact of preoperative body dysmorphic disorder symptoms on subjective outcomes after rhinoplasty, hence unveiling a crucial factor in patient dissatisfaction after aesthetic rhinoplasty.

Background: Facial plastic surgeons may primarily focus on esthetic improvement of the nasal shape in patients seeking rhinoplasty (RP). However, medical conditions inside the nasal cavity should not be neglected because they may lead to unresolved sinonasal problems and, hence, dissatisfaction after esthetic RP. This observational study investigated the prevalence of sinonasal symptoms and endonasal pathology in patients requesting esthetic RP., Methods: Patients seeking RP (n = 269) were given a questionnaire evaluating nasal obstruction and sinonasal symptoms using visual analog scales and the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test. In addition, patients underwent nasal endoscopy to evaluate anatomic and/or mucosal disease and skin-prick testing in case of clinical suspicion of allergy. Two control groups consisted of patients with an otological or general ear/nose/throat problem (n = 65) and patients who planned for endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS; n = 90)., Results: The general appraisal of nasal breathing on a scale from 0-10 in patients seeking RP was as low as 4.3 ± 3.1. Structural pathology was found in 62% of RP patients, with septal deviation being the most frequent problem encountered (54%), followed by internal nasal valve dysfunction (14%). Mucosal disease was present in 28% of RP patients. The mean SNOT-22 score of RP patients (31.8 ± 23.3) was significantly higher than the control group (11.6 ± 7.9; p < 0.001), but lower than the ESS patients (48.5 ± 22.0; p < 0.001)., Conclusion: The prevalence of endonasal structural or mucosal pathology in patients seeking RP is high and should not be overlooked at the time of planning surgery.

Background: Nasal aesthetic deformities may be associated with significant body image dissatisfaction. The only diagnostic category in the current list of psychiatric disorders that directly addresses these concerns is body dysmorphic disorder. This large-scale study determined the prevalence of body dysmorphic disorder and its symptoms in patients seeking rhinoplasty and evaluated the clinical profile of these patients., Methods: Two hundred twenty-six patients were given questionnaires including demographic characteristics, visual analogue scales for nasal shape, the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale modified for body dysmorphic disorder to assess severity of symptoms, a generic quality-of-life questionnaire, and the Derriford Appearance Scale 59, to assess appearance-related disruption of everyday living. Independent observers scored the nasal shape., Results: Thirty-three percent of patients showed at least moderate symptoms of body dysmorphic disorder. Aesthetic goals (p < 0.001), revision rhinoplasty (p = 0.003), and psychiatric history (p = 0.031) were associated with more severe symptoms. There was no correlation between the objective and subjective scoring of the nasal shape. Yale-Brown scale modified for body dysmorphic disorder scores correlated inversely with the subjective nasal scoring (n = 210, p < 0.001), without relation to the objective deformity of the nose. Body dysmorphic disorder symptoms significantly reduced the generic quality of life (n = 160, p < 0.001) and led to significant appearance-related disruption of everyday living (n = 161, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: The prevalence of moderate to severe body dysmorphic disorder symptoms in an aesthetic rhinoplasty population is high. Patients undergoing revision rhinoplasty and with psychiatric history are particularly at risk. Body dysmorphic disorder symptoms significantly reduce the quality of life and cause significant appearance-related disruption of everyday living., Clinical Question/level of Evidence: Risk, III.

Objectives: We surveyed the subjective outcome of secondary rhinoplasty in cleft lip patients., Methods: Questionnaires were sent to 38 patients who had undergone a secondary rhinoplasty. A total of 30 questionnaires were returned and analyzed. Patients were asked to score their preoperative and postoperative nasal function and form. The validated Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) questionnaire was supplemented with questions on the subjective burden of the procedure and general satisfaction. In parallel, the objective aesthetic outcome was judged by 2 surgeons using preoperative and postoperative photographs., Results: There was a significant subjective improvement in ROE scores (from 39.3 ± 3.1 to 73.1 ± 2.0, p < 0.001), and in specific scores for nasal aesthetical appearance (from 3.6 ± 0.3 to 7.9 ± 0.2, p < 0.0001) and breathing capacity (from 4.9 ± 0.4 to 6.8 ± 0.3, p < 0.01). Subjective improvement in nasal aesthetics was generally evaluated to be better than improvement in nasal breathing. In retrospect, all patients would undergo the procedure again. Patient satisfaction did not correlate with the surgeon's appreciation of the aesthetic outcome of the rhinoplasty., Conclusion: Patient satisfaction after secondary rhinoplasty in cleft lip patients is high and comparable to that of non-cleft lip rhinoplasty patients., (Copyright © 2011 American Rhinologic Society-American Academy of Otolaryngic Allergy, LLC.)

Rhinoplasty occupies a unique position in facial plastic surgery due to the central position of the nose in the face and the vital functions of the nose. Among facial plastic surgeons, secondary rhinoplasty in adult cleft-lip patients is considered to be one of the most challenging surgical interventions due to the congenital distortion of the cartilaginous and bony nasal pyramid, with consequences for both nasal aesthetics and breathing. In spite of the challenging nature of the procedure, post-operative satisfaction is high, matching that of non-cleft-lip patients, as long as appropriate surgical techniques are applied. Specific rhinoplasty methods are used in unilateral or bilateral cleft-lip patients with extensive grafting, combined efforts for aligning the nasal dorsum and the creation of symmetry in the nasal tip, medialisation of the anterior nasal spine with augmentation of the premaxilla, correction of nasal vestibulum stenosis and specific post-operative care with a nasal vestibulum device. This review aims to address some specific surgical issues relating to cleft-lip rhinoplasty, resulting in the high subjective satisfaction rate reported by cleft patients operated upon in the University Hospitals Leuven.

Objective: In cases of dissatisfaction after rhinoplasty for esthetic or functional reasons, or both, revision rhinoplasty may be advocated to improve the patients' nasal performance. In contrast to studies on primary rhinoplasty, no objective outcome evaluation parameter has been validated in revision rhinoplasty, nor has there been a study specifically looking at long-term satisfaction after revision rhinoplasty. We aim at studying patient satisfaction after a long-term follow-up of revision rhinoplasty performed at an academic referral center., Methods: At a mean period of 2.5 years after revision rhinoplasty, 90 patients who underwent a revision rhinoplasty at the Academic Medical Center in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, were sent a questionnaire on general satisfaction together with the validated rhinoplasty outcome evaluation (ROE) questionnaire., Results: Of the 46 patients who responded to the questionnaire, 88% experienced a significant improvement in nasal performance by revision rhinoplasty, and 79% would choose to undergo the revision procedure again. Subgroup analysis of the ROE scores demonstrated that good satisfaction was mainly obtained in the young adult and middle-aged groups, without major differences between males and females. Satisfaction was unrelated to the open or closed technique used for revision, or to the graft material used. Interestingly, an inverse correlation was found between satisfaction and the number of previous rhinoplasties., Conclusions: This retrospective study demonstrates that revision rhinoplasty in an academic practice provides most patients with long-standing satisfaction.