rhinoplasty.cc
Menu

Journal archive · Preservation rhinoplasty · 2020

ASJ Aesthetic Surgery Journal · 2020

Decision Making in Preservation Rhinoplasty: A 100 Case Series With One-Year Follow-Up

Kosins AM, Daniel RK.

What this paper says

Across 100 primary cases with at least a year of follow-up, all patients had the covering soft tissue preserved, 54 had the tip cartilages preserved, and 31 had the bridge preserved rather than reduced.

Overview

Preservation rhinoplasty, a term coined in 2018, reshapes the nose by keeping structures intact rather than removing and rebuilding them. This retrospective single-surgeon series records which structures were actually preserved in practice and in what combinations.

Sections of note

  • 153 primary rhinoplasty cases studied retrospectively between December 2016 and August 2017; 100 had at least 1 year of follow-up.
  • Technical details recorded included dissection plane, ligament preservation, tip support, lateral crural maneuvers, alar contour grafts, and dorsal preservation versus traditional reduction.
  • All patients had open rhinoplasty; average follow-up 13 months.
  • All patients had preservation of the dorsal soft tissue envelope; in 36 the entire soft tissue envelope and ligaments were preserved.
  • 54 had preservation of the alar cartilages; 31 had dorsal preservation.
  • Combinations: complete preservation of skin, dorsum and alars in 24; skin and dorsum in 2; alars and dorsum in 2; skin and alars in 7.
  • Conclusions: preserve the lateral crura where possible and choose tensioning over excision; dorsal preservation is versatile with proper patient selection. Level of evidence 4.

What it means for a patient

  • Preservation is not all or nothing: different parts of the nose can be preserved independently.
  • Complete preservation, where nothing is removed and the structures are reshaped in place, applied to 24 of 100 patients.
  • Preserving the bridge is described as avoiding long-term problems at the middle vault and keystone area.
  • Limits: one surgeon, retrospective, no comparison group against conventional technique, no outcome scores, and average follow-up of 13 months.

Why this paper matters

Preservation rhinoplasty grew rapidly in the years after this paper, and this documents how the approach was actually applied case by case. It shows selection matters: fewer than a third had dorsal preservation. The abstract reports what was done rather than how the results compared.

Terms

  • Preservation rhinoplasty: Reshaping the nose while keeping existing structures intact.
  • Dorsal soft tissue envelope: The skin, fat and muscle layer covering the bridge.
  • Lateral crus: The outer arm of the tip cartilage.
  • Tensioning: Reshaping cartilage by putting it under tension rather than cutting it out.
  • Keystone: The junction where the nasal bones meet the cartilage of the middle nose.

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

From the abstract

“Preservation rhinoplasty (PR) is a new chapter in rhinoplasty history. The term was coined by Daniel in 2018 and represents a fundamental change in philosophy. Objectives: The aim of this study is to discuss a single-surgeon case series utilizing PR techniques. Methods: One hundred fifty-three primary rhinoplasty…”

Excerpt; the full abstract is on PubMed.

Citation

PubMed
Journal
Aesthetic Surgery Journal
Year
2020
Authors
2
Type
Journal Article
Access
Subscription
On this site
Summary and abstract

Authors on this site