A new preservation technique for dehumping the dorsum.

OBJECTIVE We aimed to offer a new preservation strategy for dehumping the dorsum by using a variation of the cartilage push-down (Ishida) technique. PATIENTS AND METHODS Three hundred patients (42 males and 258 females) had surgical procedures. All procedures were closed-surgery-type, primary-case procedures performed through a closed incision. Low cartilaginous septal strip resection was performed on 269 individuals, whereas high septal strip resection was performed on the remaining 31 patients. The bony cap is shielded as a separate unit and preserved, so protected from any potential damage. The cartilage roof is separated from the bone roof and lowered while wearing the bony cap component. As a result, less concealment is required. However, it is ineffective on dorsal profiles that are sharp or S-shaped, as opposed to flat. Thus, the modified cartilage push-down with bony cap rasping procedure can be carried out. The sharp hump on the bony crown of the skull is smoothed out and filled. Therefore, the bony cap above the central cartilage roof is much thinner. Because the hump is less likely to appear again, concealment is unnecessary. A median of 8.5 months was spent following-up (6-14 months). RESULTS According to our method, among men (n=42), the hump size ranged from minor (n=5) to medium (n=25) to big (n=12). There were 258 women, 88 of whom had a little hump, 160 had a medium hump, and 10 had a huge hump. Indicative of surgeon satisfaction with low cartilaginous septal strip excision vs. high septal strip resection include the following: with a total of 269 patients, 35 males, and 234 females had low cartilaginous septal strip resections, with 98 and 96% success rates, respectively, for the surgeons. There were 31 patients, seven men and 24 women, who all underwent high septal strip resections, with a 98% and 96% success rate for the surgeons. It was found that there was a correlation between the size of the hump and the level of satisfaction felt by its bearers. Rates of male satisfaction with humps ranged from 100% for little humps to 100% for medium humps to 99% for huge humps. Satisfaction percentages among women ranged from 98% in the case of little humps to 96% among medium humps and 95% among large humps. CONCLUSIONS Our technique of modification of the cartilage push-down (Ishida)1 method is applied for dehumping the dorsum. High satisfaction percentages were obtained from the patients and surgeons. This technique may be a good option for patients who need dehumping.

[1]  C. Cingi,et al.  Investigation of ideal ointment combination to use in septorhinoplasty or nasal flap surgeries. , 2022, European review for medical and pharmacological sciences.

[2]  R. Gemperli,et al.  Nasal Hump Treatment With Cartilaginous Push-Down and Preservation of the Bony Cap , 2020, Aesthetic surgery journal.

[3]  Sam P. Most,et al.  A Review and Modification of Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty Techniques , 2020, Facial plastic surgery & aesthetic medicine.

[4]  Sam P. Most,et al.  Impact of Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty Versus Dorsal Hump Resection on the Internal Nasal Valve: a Quantitative Radiological Study , 2020, Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.

[5]  U. Tuncel,et al.  The probable reasons of dorsal hump problems following let-down / push-down rhinoplasty and solution proposals. , 2019, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[6]  Y. Saban,et al.  Dorsal Preservation: The Push Down Technique Reassessed , 2018, Aesthetic surgery journal.

[7]  C. Reis,et al.  Spare Roof Technique: A Middle Third New Technique , 2016, Facial Plastic Surgery.

[8]  Aaron M. Kosins,et al.  The osseocartilaginous vault of the nose: anatomy and surgical observations. , 2015, Aesthetic surgery journal.

[9]  R. Gola Functional and Esthetic Rhinoplasty , 2003, Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.

[10]  L. H. Ishida,et al.  Treatment of the nasal hump with preservation of the cartilaginous framework. , 1999, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[11]  G. Peck,et al.  Anatomy of aesthetic surgery of the nose. , 1987, Clinics in plastic surgery.

[12]  P. Johnson,et al.  Anatomy of the Nasal Hump , 1986, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[13]  L. Bernstein Surgical anatomy in rhinoplasty. , 1975, Otolaryngologic clinics of North America.

[14]  W. K. Wright Surgery of the bony and cartilaginous dorsum. , 1975, Otolaryngologic clinics of North America.

[15]  L. Sether,et al.  ANATOMICAL DETAILS OF THE OSSEOUS-CARTILAGINOUS FRAMEWORK OF THE NOSE , 1971, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[16]  J. Converse The cartilaginous structures of the nose. , 1957, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.

[17]  M. Cottle Nasal roof repair and hump removal. , 1954, A.M.A. archives of otolaryngology.

[18]  U. Tuncel,et al.  The Probable Reasons for Dorsal Hump Problems following Let-Down/Push-Down Rhinoplasty and Solution Proposals. , 2019, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[19]  Aaron M. Kosins,et al.  Decision Making in Preservation Rhinoplasty: A 100 Case Series With One-Year Follow-Up. , 2019, Aesthetic surgery journal.

[20]  F. Braccini,et al.  La rhinoplastie : anatomie morpho-dynamique de la rhinoplastie. Intérêt de la rhinoplastie conservatrice , 2006 .

[21]  R. Gola [Conservative rhinoplasty]. , 1994, Annales de chirurgie plastique et esthetique.

[22]  R. Daniel,et al.  Surgical anatomy of septorhinoplasty. , 1985, Archives of otolaryngology.

[23]  E. Huizing Push-down of the external nasal pyramid by resection of wedges. , 1975, Rhinology.

[24]  J. Joseph Nasenplastik und sonstige Gesichtsplastik : nebst einem Anhang über Mammaplastik und einige weitere Operationen aus dem Gebiete der äusseren Körperplastik : ein Atlas und Lehrbuch , 1931 .