rhinoplasty.cc
Menu

Journal archive · Revision and secondary rhinoplasty · 2016

FPS Clin Facial Plastic Surgery Clinics of North America · 2016

Controversies in Revision Rhinoplasty

Rosenberger ES, Toriumi DM.

What this paper says

A review of revision rhinoplasty arguing that the patient's own cartilage is the primary graft material despite its limited supply, and that synthetic implants used for augmentation may have devastating consequences.

Overview

Revision rhinoplasty involves many variables affecting the final appearance and breathing result. Cartilage forms the structural framework of the lower two thirds of the nose and is what keeps the airway open long term. The article discusses past and current approaches to correcting various nasal deformities using the grafting techniques available.

Sections of note

  • The article is a review chapter, not a study of patients.
  • Cartilage is described as essential for long-term support and for keeping the nasal airway open.
  • Autologous cartilage grafting is named as the primary source of that material.
  • Its limits are stated as the quantity available at each donor site, the quality of that cartilage, and the harm caused by harvesting it.
  • Alloplastic materials, both solid and injectable, are often used for augmentation.
  • The authors state these may have devastating consequences. No patient numbers, complication rates or comparative outcome data appear in the abstract.

What it means for a patient

  • Rebuilding a nose after previous surgery generally requires cartilage from the patient's own body, most often from the ribs when the septum has already been used.
  • The three limits on that cartilage, how much, how good and what harvesting costs, drive most of the planning in a revision.
  • The warning about synthetic implants is strongly worded and reflects infection, movement and extrusion as recognised outcomes.
  • A narrative review with no reported rates cannot say how often either graft type fails.

Why this paper matters

Revision rhinoplasty exists largely to correct problems created by first operations, and implant complications are a recurring source of those problems. Framing autologous cartilage as the standard, with named constraints, is the mainstream position here. The comparative data that would settle the implant question are not available.

Terms

  • Revision rhinoplasty: an operation to correct the result of previous nasal surgery.
  • Autologous cartilage: cartilage taken from the patient's own body.
  • Alloplastic material: a manufactured implant material rather than the patient's own tissue.
  • Donor site morbidity: the harm or side effects caused at the place graft tissue is taken from.
  • Patent airway: a nasal passage that stays open to airflow.
  • Augmentation: building up part of the nose to increase its height or projection.

Summary written by rhinoplasty.cc from the abstract, 2026-09-08; not medical advice. The authors' own abstract follows.

From the abstract

“Revision rhinoplasty is a complex operation with many variables that may influence the final esthetic and functional outcome of the procedure. Cartilage forms the structural framework of the lower two-thirds of nose and is essential for long-term support and maintenance of a patent nasal airway. The use of autologous…”

Excerpt; the full abstract is on PubMed.

Citation

PubMed
Journal
Facial Plastic Surgery Clinics of North America
Year
2016
Authors
2
Type
Journal Article, Review
Access
Subscription
On this site
Summary and abstract

Authors on this site

Start here

What the rhinoplasty literature says on this paper's topic, cited line by line to PubMed.

Related papers

Same topic, 2016.

  1. CPS
    2016PMID 26616707Summary
  2. CPS
    Revision Rhinoplasty
    Loyo M, Wang TD
    2016PMID 26616705Summary
  3. FPS
    2016PMID 26862968Summary
  4. FPS
    2016PMID 27494585Summary
  5. FPS
    2016PMID 27494586Summary
  6. FPS
    2016PMID 26862969Summary
  7. FPS
    2016PMID 28033636Summary
  8. JAMA FPS
    2016PMID 27149684Summary