rhinoplasty.cc
Menu

Journal archive · Preservation rhinoplasty · 2025

FPS Facial Plastic Surgery · 2025

The Best and Worst of the Structural Preservation Rhinoplasty

Toriumi DM.

What this paper says

A brief article listing the topics covered in a discussion of good and poor outcomes with structural and preservation rhinoplasty; the abstract itself contains only a list of headings and no findings.

Overview

The stated purpose is to discuss good and poor outcomes in structure and preservation rhinoplasty. The abstract reads as a list of section headings rather than a summary. It states that both techniques are time tested, and names the topics addressed: relevant anatomy, use of the piezotome, proper indications, the techniques themselves, and postoperative care.

Sections of note

  • Article type: single author review or commentary. No patient numbers, outcomes or complication rates are reported.
  • Stated purpose: to discuss good and poor outcomes in structure and preservation rhinoplasty.
  • Stated position: both dorsal preservation and structural rhinoplasty are time tested techniques.
  • Topics listed: pertinent anatomy, use of the piezotome, proper indications, the techniques, and postoperative care.
  • Stated conclusion: both are effective techniques in rhinoplasty.
  • The abstract lists headings without content, so no specific good or poor outcomes are identified.
  • No comparison, rates or evidence appear.

What it means for a patient

  • Nothing substantive can be drawn from this record.
  • The one position stated is that neither approach is dismissed, and both are described as effective.
  • Proper indications is listed as a topic, which reflects the recurring point that technique choice depends on the individual nose.
  • The abstract carries no findings. It identifies no specific outcomes, good or bad.

Why this paper matters

The author is a prominent figure in the preservation debate, so a piece addressing both good and poor outcomes would carry weight in a literature where negative results are rarely published. The abstract as recorded does not convey any of that content. Only the full text would show what is argued.

Terms

  • Structural rhinoplasty: the approach that divides and rebuilds the framework with grafts and sutures.
  • Dorsal preservation: lowering the bridge while keeping its natural surface intact.
  • Piezotome: an ultrasonic instrument that cuts bone while sparing soft tissue.
  • Indication: the circumstance in which a technique is considered appropriate.
  • Postoperative care: the treatment and instructions given after surgery.

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

From the abstract

“To discuss good and poor outcomes in Structure and Preservation rhinoplasty.Dorsal preservation and structure rhinoplasty are time tested techniques.Pertinent anatomy will be discussed.Use of the piezotome is mentioned.Proper indications will be covered.Structure and preservation techniques are discussed.Postoperative…”

Excerpt; the full abstract is on PubMed.

Citation

PubMed
Journal
Facial Plastic Surgery
Year
2025
Authors
1
Type
Journal Article
Access
Subscription
On this site
Summary and abstract

Authors on this site

Start here

What the rhinoplasty literature says on this paper's topic, cited line by line to PubMed.

Related papers

Same topic, 2025.

  1. ASJ
    2025PMID 39876773Summary
  2. ASJ
    2025PMID 39498873Summary
  3. ASJ
    2025PMID 39812015Summary
  4. ASJ
    2025PMID 40179243Summary
  5. ASJ
    2025PMID 40972537Summary
  6. APS
    2025PMID 39117869Summary
  7. APS
    2025PMID 40195129Summary
  8. APS
    2025PMID 40195130Summary