Journal archive · Preservation rhinoplasty · Dorsum and hump · 2025
Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty: The Perspective of "Preservers" vs. "Structured" Surgeons
Santos M, Most SP, Wayne I, Seneldir S, Ferreira MG.
What this paper says
Surveying 145 surgeons worldwide, preservation techniques were more common among plastic surgeons and among those with 10 to 20 years of experience, with hump recurrence the most cited reason for still using structural methods.
Overview
The authors set out to describe which surgeons have adopted dorsal preservation and how they use it. An anonymous form, reviewed by the board of the Evidence-Based Rhinoplasty Research Group, was shared on the group's Telegram channel. Respondents were sorted into three groups by their answers: Preservers, Mainly Structural, and Structural exclusively.
Sections of note
- Design: anonymous survey of 145 surgeons worldwide, self selected from a research interest group.
- Preservation was more common among plastic surgeons than among otolaryngologists and facial plastic surgeons.
- Preservation techniques were preferred by surgeons with 10 to 20 years of experience; structural techniques by those with over 20 years.
- 50.8 percent of surgeons preferring preservation use it in more than 90 percent of first time operations.
- Surface techniques have been used more, mainly by surgeons who prefer structural techniques, p less than 0.001.
- Surface techniques were considered more stable, more predictable and to have a shorter learning curve, all p less than 0.001.
- Many surgeons using preservation still perform structural rhinoplasty, most often citing hump persistence or recurrence.
What it means for a patient
- Whether you are offered preservation depends partly on your surgeon's specialty and how long they have practised.
- Among surgeons who adopt it, half use it in nearly every first time operation, so it is a default rather than an occasional choice for them.
- Hump recurrence is the acknowledged reason preservation surgeons keep the structural approach available.
- Limits: this records opinion and reported practice, not measured outcomes, and respondents were self selected from an online group with a stated interest in the topic.
Why this paper matters
Preservation rhinoplasty is spreading faster than comparative evidence, so how surgeons actually use it and why they hesitate is informative in itself. The stated perceptions of stability and predictability are beliefs, not measurements. Whether those beliefs match outcomes is unresolved.
Terms
- Dorsal preservation: lowering the bridge while keeping its natural surface intact.
- Structural rhinoplasty: the approach that divides and rebuilds the framework with grafts and sutures.
- Surface technique: reshaping the bridge from above while keeping its outer surface.
- Hump recurrence: the bump on the bridge returning after it was lowered.
- Learning curve: how much practice a technique requires to perform reliably.
- Otolaryngologist: an ear, nose and throat surgeon.
Summary written by rhinoplasty.cc from the abstract, 2026-09-09; not medical advice. The authors' own abstract follows.
From the abstract
“The objective of this study was to describe the surgeons who have incorporated dorsal preservation (DP) into their practice and their techniques. An anonymous form reviewed by the Evidence-Based Rhinoplasty Research Group board was shared on its Telegram group. The study population was divided into three groups based…”
Excerpt; the full abstract is on PubMed.
Citation
Authors on this site
Start here
What the rhinoplasty literature says on this paper's topics, cited line by line to PubMed.
Preservation rhinoplasty
193 papers on this topic.
Dorsum and hump
227 papers on this topic.
Related papers
Same topic, 2025.
- ASJ Closed Preservation Rhinoplasty in the Mestizo Patient: Challenges and Techniques for Nasal Tip SupportValdivia C, Durand PD, Çakir B2025PMID 39876773Summary
- ASJ Crowdsourced Assessment of Aesthetic Outcomes of Dorsal Preservation RhinoplastyAlford JA, McCleary S, Roostaeian J2025PMID 39498873Summary
- ASJ Optimizing Closed-Approach Preservation Rhinoplasty by Ultrasonic Piezo-assisted Techniques for Enhanced PrecisionGuilarte R, Malzone G2025PMID 39812015Summary
- ASJ Radiological and Anatomical Parameters as Determinants of Success in Dorsal Preservation RhinoplastyKemal Ö, Tahir E, Çolak O et al.2025PMID 40179243Summary
- ASJ Scalpel vs Electrocautery for Upper Lateral Cartilage Contouring in Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Comparative StudyŞibar S, Erdal AI, Okutan MT2025PMID 40972537Summary
- APS A New Tool to Determine the Accurate Lateral Osteotomy Line in Rhinoplasty with PiezosurgeryGuliyev M2025PMID 38926251Full text
- APS Combining Piezo and Power Tools for a Better Outcome in Hybrid Structural-Preservation RhinoplastyRobotti E, Khazaal A, Leone F et al.2025PMID 39117869Summary
- APS Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes Between Dorsal Preservation and Conventional Dorsal Hump Reduction Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-AnalysisKim DH, Jang DW, Hwang SH2025PMID 40195129Summary