Journal archive · Anatomy and nasal analysis · 2022
An Artificial Intelligence Tool for Image Simulation in Rhinoplasty
Chinski H, Lerch R, Tournour D, Chinski L, Caruso D.
What this paper says
Ninety seven doctors rated rhinoplasty simulations made by a surgeon and by an artificial intelligence model, agreeing with the AI images 68.4 percent of the time against 77.3 percent for the surgeon.
Overview
Surgeons usually create a computer simulation of the expected result during a rhinoplasty consultation. The study asked whether an artificial intelligence model can learn a surgeon's style and criteria and produce that simulation automatically. It was a cross sectional survey of resident and specialist ear, nose and throat doctors conducted in November 2019 at a rhinoplasty conference.
Sections of note
- Cross sectional survey; the study reports a level of evidence of 4.
- Ninety seven of 122 doctors agreed to participate.
- Simulation images created by a surgeon and by the artificial intelligence model were shown in random order.
- Participants rated agreement on a seven point scale, from 1 for total disagreement to 7 for total agreement.
- Median agreement with the surgeon's simulation was 6, interquartile range 5 to 7.
- Median agreement with the model's simulation was 5, interquartile range 4 to 6, P less than 0.0001.
- Evaluators totally or partially agreed with the model 68.4 percent of the time, 95 percent confidence interval 64.9 to 71.7.
- They totally or partially agreed with the surgeon 77.3 percent of the time, 95 percent confidence interval 74.2 to 80.3.
What it means for a patient
- The automated simulations were rated close to but significantly below the surgeon's own.
- The authors suggest this could give patients a realistic preview before an in person consultation.
- Doctors rated the images, not patients, and no actual surgery or outcome was involved.
- A simulation is a rendering of an intended result, not a prediction of what surgery will produce.
Why this paper matters
Simulation is central to rhinoplasty consultation and depends on the individual surgeon's time and eye. This study tests whether that judgment can be automated. Whether an automated simulation set before a consultation helps or misleads patients is untested.
Terms
- Artificial intelligence model: software trained on examples to reproduce a pattern automatically.
- Simulation: a digitally altered image showing an intended surgical result.
- Likert scale: an ordered rating scale, here with seven points.
- Interquartile range: the middle half of the values in a set.
- Cross sectional survey: a snapshot of opinions collected at one point in time.
Summary written by rhinoplasty.cc from the abstract, 2026-09-09; not medical advice. The authors' own abstract follows.
From the abstract
“During rhinoplasty consultations, surgeons typically create a computer simulation of the expected result. An artificial intelligence model (AIM) can learn a surgeon's style and criteria and generate the simulation automatically. The objective of this study is to determine if an AIM is capable of imitating a surgeon's…”
Excerpt; the full abstract is on PubMed.
Citation
Start here
What the rhinoplasty literature says on this paper's topic, cited line by line to PubMed.
Related papers
Same topic, 2022.
- ASJ Commentary on: Computed Tomography Analysis of Nasal Anatomy in Dorsal Preservation RhinoplastyMost SP2022PMID 34546291
- ASJ Computed Tomography Analysis of Nasal Anatomy in Dorsal Preservation RhinoplastyEravci FC, Özer H, Arbağ H et al.2022PMID 34436559Summary
- ASJ Spreader Graft vs Spreader Flap in Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Aesthetic and Functional OutcomesKeyhan SO, Fallahi HR, Cheshmi B et al.2022PMID 34864854Summary
- APS Aesthetic Science of Rhinoplasty: Three PrinciplesGruber RP, Holland M, Rochlin D et al.2022PMID 35441238Summary
- APS Anatomical Comparative Study of the External Nasal Nerve in Caucasian and Asian: Application for Minimizing Nerve Damage in RhinoplastyChen Y, Carr CB2022PMID 34498142Summary
- APS Effects of Functional Rhinoplasty on Nasal Obstruction: A Meta-AnalysisZhao R, Chen K, Tang Y2022PMID 35099579Summary
- APS Ideal Reference Lines for Assessment of Facial Asymmetry in Rhinoplasty PatientsLee KH, Kang JW, Lee HY et al.2022PMID 34498143Summary
- APS Invited Discussion on: Ideal Reference Lines for Assessment of Facial Asymmetry in Rhinoplasty PatientsMaan ZN, Berkowitz RL2022PMID 34676430Full text