Journal archive · Rib, ear and septal grafts · Anatomy and nasal analysis · 2022
The Safety and Efficacy of Spreader Grafts and Autospreaders in Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Buba CM, Patel PN, Saltychev M, Kandathil CK, Most SP.
What this paper says
Pooling 17 studies reporting breathing scores, rhinoplasty improved NOSE scores by 23.9 points on average, with no difference between spreader grafts, autospreader flaps and no graft at all.
Overview
The study systematically evaluated the evidence on outcomes and complications of spreader grafts and autospreader flaps when rebuilding the middle of the nose after hump removal. It followed the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, with inclusion criteria based on the population, intervention, comparison and outcome framework. Medline, EMBASE, Cinahl, Scopus and Web of Science were searched for studies published before March 2021.
Sections of note
- Systematic review and meta analysis; 52 of 1,129 relevant studies were included in the qualitative analysis; level of evidence III.
- Thirty four studies, 65.4 percent, concerned spreader grafts; 10 studies, 21.1 percent, autospreader flaps alone; and 8 studies, 13.5 percent, both.
- Meta analysis was performed on 17 studies reporting change in NOSE scores.
- The pooled effect was minus 23.9 points, 95 percent confidence interval minus 26.7 to minus 21.1.
- Heterogeneity was very high, I squared equals 99 percent.
- Summary data showed no difference between autospreader flap and no graft, P equals 0.7578.
- No difference was found between autospreader flap and spreader flap, P equals 0.9948.
- No difference was found between spreader graft and no graft, P equals 0.6608.
What it means for a patient
- Breathing scores improved substantially after rhinoplasty regardless of which technique, or whether any graft, was used.
- The heterogeneity figure of 99 percent means the included studies disagreed almost completely, which weakens the pooled estimate.
- The comparison groups were not randomized, so patients receiving no graft may have needed less support to begin with.
- The finding does not mean grafts are unnecessary, only that this pooled data cannot distinguish their effect.
Why this paper matters
Spreader grafts are standard practice after hump removal on the reasoning that the airway would otherwise narrow. This large review finds no measurable difference in patient reported breathing between using them, folding the cartilage instead, or doing neither. The extreme heterogeneity means the question is not settled.
Terms
- Spreader graft: a cartilage strip placed beside the septum to widen the internal breathing valve.
- Autospreader flap: the patient's own upper cartilages folded inward for the same purpose.
- Middle vault: the middle third of the nose between the bony bridge and the tip.
- NOSE score: the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation, where lower is better.
- Heterogeneity, I squared: a measure of how much the included studies disagree.
Summary written by rhinoplasty.cc from the abstract, 2026-09-09; not medical advice. The authors' own abstract follows.
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the evidence of surgical outcomes and complications of spreader grafts and autospreader flaps in the context of middle vault reconstruction after dorsal hump removal.
Material And Methods: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were based on the population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) framework. Medline (via PubMed), EMBASE, Cinahl, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for Clinical and observational studies published in peer-reviewed academic journals with abstracts available that reported rhinoplasty employing either spreader graft or autospreader flap techniques and were published prior to March, 2021.
Results: Fifty-two of 1129 relevant studies were included in the qualitative analysis. Thirty-four studies (65.4%) were related to spreader graft (SG), 10 (21.1%) studies of autospreader flap (AF) alone and 8 (13.5%) studies involving both grafts. Meta-analysis was performed on 17 studies reporting change in NOSE scores, with pooled effect of - 23.9 (95% CI, - 26.7 to - 21.1) points. High heterogeneity with I2 = 99%. Summary data showed no differences between groups, AF group versus no graft (p = 0.7578), AF versus SF group (p = 0.9948), and SG group versus no graft (p = 0.6608).
Conclusion: Based on available data, change in NOSE scores after rhinoplasty was similar in procedures that used spreader graft only or autospreader flap only.
Level Of Evidence Iii: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.
Abstract as indexed by PubMed; the article is open access (PubMed Central).
Citation
Authors on this site
Start here
What the rhinoplasty literature says on this paper's topics, cited line by line to PubMed.
Rib, ear and septal grafts
242 papers on this topic.
Anatomy and nasal analysis
325 papers on this topic.
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 Comparison of Free Diced and Multiple Toothpick-Shaped Costal Cartilage Injection Techniques for Augmentation RhinoplastyGu T, Li X, Yang X et al.2022PMID 34595596Summary
- APS Diced Cartilage Techniques in RhinoplastyDong W, Han R, Fan F2022PMID 34731262Summary
- APS Effects of Functional Rhinoplasty on Nasal Obstruction: A Meta-AnalysisZhao R, Chen K, Tang Y2022PMID 35099579Summary