Journal archive · Preservation rhinoplasty · 2022
Use of a Surgical Microscope for Subperichondrial-Subperiosteal Dissection in Preservation Rhinoplasty: Ergonomic Considerations
Hattori Y, Uda H, Sugawara Y.
What this paper says
A proposal to use a surgical microscope rather than loupes for the deep tissue plane dissection of preservation rhinoplasty, on the grounds of both visualization and surgeon posture.
Overview
Preservation of anatomical components in rhinoplasty has become more popular. Lifting the skin covering in a continuous plane beneath the membranes over cartilage and bone preserves soft tissue, vessels, nerves and lymphatics, which the authors state may lead to faster healing with less swelling and scarring. However, the technique requires a learning phase and is usually done under magnifying loupes, making it slow and demanding.
Sections of note
- Technique proposal; the abstract reports no patient numbers, no outcomes and no follow up.
- Continuous dissection beneath the perichondrium and periosteum preserves soft tissue, vessels, nerves and lymphatics.
- The authors state this may result in faster healing with less swelling and scarring.
- The dissection is described as time consuming and burdensome, especially in revision cases.
- The authors raise the risk of musculoskeletal discomfort and injury to the surgeon.
- They propose using a surgical microscope for the dissection.
- A microscope is said to give clear visualization and allow precise, delicate manipulation.
- It is also said to let surgeons keep an ideal posture with neutral joint positioning, reducing physical strain.
What it means for a patient
- The deep dissection plane is what preserves the nerves and vessels in the nasal covering, which is the stated reason for less swelling.
- The proposal concerns how the surgeon sees and reaches that plane, not what is done to the nose.
- Claims about faster healing and reduced swelling are stated as possibilities, with no supporting data.
- Surgeon posture and injury risk are the article's second concern, which is about the surgeon rather than the patient.
Why this paper matters
Preservation techniques demand a more meticulous dissection than conventional rhinoplasty, and that burden falls on the surgeon's hands, eyes and back. This article proposes an equipment answer. Whether a microscope improves the dissection or the result has not been measured.
Terms
- Subperichondrial dissection: separating tissue beneath the membrane covering cartilage.
- Subperiosteal dissection: separating tissue beneath the membrane covering bone.
- Soft tissue envelope: the skin, fat and muscle covering the nasal framework.
- Surgical loupes: magnifying lenses worn on glasses.
- Ergonomics: the design of work conditions to reduce physical strain and injury.
- Lymphatics: the vessels that drain tissue fluid, whose disruption increases swelling.
Summary written by rhinoplasty.cc from the abstract, 2026-09-09; not medical advice. The authors' own abstract follows.
Abstract
Preservation of anatomical components in rhinoplasty has gained increasing popularity over recent years. Given that elevation of the soft tissue envelope in a continuous subperiochondrial-subperiosteal dissection preserves soft tissues, vessels, nerves, and lymphatics, this procedure may result in faster healing time and less swelling and scarring. However, the technique requires a learning phase and can be challenging to perform because it typically requires meticulous dissection under surgical loupes. The dissection may thus be time-consuming and a burden for surgeons, especially in secondary rhinoplasty cases. Further, the potential risk of musculoskeletal discomfort and injury to the surgeon should not be overlooked; consideration for surgical ergonomics is needed to prevent injuries and enhance surgical performance. To address these issues, we propose the use of a surgical microscope for subperiochondrial-subperiosteal dissection in preservation rhinoplasty. A microscope enables clear visualization of the surgical field and allows surgeons to make precise and delicate manipulation maneuvers. Moreover, it may also enable surgeons to maintain an ideal ergonomic posture and neutral positioning of their joints, thereby reducing physical strain. A surgical microscope may thus be a useful tool for subperiochondrial-subperiosteal dissection by providing clear visualization of the surgical field and improved surgical ergonomics for surgeons.
Abstract as indexed by PubMed; the article is open access (PubMed Central).
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 2022PMID 35443047Summary
- APS Closed Piezo Preservation RhinoplastyAlmazov I, Rovira RV, Farhadov V2022PMID 35169916Summary
- APS Invited Discussion on: Quality of Life And Outcome After Preservation Rhinoplasty Using The Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation QuestionnaireGruber RP, Deptula P, Conkling N2022PMID 35320375
- APS Piezo-Assisted Dorsal Preservation in Rhinoplasty: When and WhyTaglialatela Scafati S, Regalado-Briz A2022PMID 33987697Summary
- APS Quality of Life (QoL) and Outcome After Preservation Rhinoplasty (PR) Using the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) Questionnaire-A Prospective Observational Single-Centre StudyStergiou G, Schweigler A, Finocchi V et al.2022PMID 35169915Summary
- APS Reply to: Invited Discussion on: Quality of Life and Outcome After Preservation Rhinoplasty Using the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation QuestionnaireBarone M, Cogliandro A, Persichetti P2022PMID 35737021Summary