rhinoplasty.cc
Menu

Journal archive · by topic

Anatomy and nasal analysis

325 papers with rhinoplasty in the title matching this topic, 2011 to 2026.

325
Papers
40
Start here
246
Abstracts on file
80
Open access
10
Journals
2011
First year
2026
Latest year
246
Summaries written
APS82PRS62ASJ58FPS50FPSAM31PRS-GO22JAMA FPS12FPS Clin4CPS2Arch FPS2
72011620128201311201452015222016172017172018182019292020242021292022312023202024362025452026

What the literature says

Synthesised from the abstracts of the 40 papers listed under Start here. Every line carries the PubMed ID it rests on.

Two-sentence lead. Nasal analysis now pairs measured angles and ratios (nasolabial angle, Goode's ratio, airway cross-section, dorsal aesthetic line width by AI) with patient-reported scales that have population norms and a validated NOSE-to-SCHNOS crosswalk, and technique is chosen from classified anatomy: tip volume/projection/rotation, lateral crural shape, nasal sill type, skin thickness, nasal bone length and kyphion angle on CT. Blinded raters pick preservation from structural noses only 52.9% of the time, a neural network shows primary rhinoplasty makes patients 17.58% more alike, and a skin-thinning drug, isotretinoin, is trending online as a nose-shrinking treatment far ahead of the evidence.

Key points

  • Volume-projection-rotation (VPR) assessment applied to 19,643 closed primaries (1979-2019): 22% minimal defects by non-delivery approach, 78% by delivery; 67% needed tip-interrupting techniques; 88.7% satisfied; 12.3% minor revision over 20 years [39187588]
  • Lateral crura deformity classification with algorithm, 50 patients (80% primary), mean follow-up 14.2 months: NOSE improved; 90% reported significant gain; 4% revision [42624495]
  • Nasal sill morphology from the base view classifies secondary cleft deformity, 276 patients: type I 4.71%, II 9.06%, III 26.45%, IV 59.78% [39572464]
  • Septal extension graft vs columellar strut, 8 studies (256 vs 371): long-term nasolabial angle favored SEG; Goode's ratio improved only with SEG [40854551]
  • DPR vs hump reduction pooled cohort (n=1364): mean age 30.59 ± 7.27; 75.22% female; open approach 772 (56.6%), closed 592 (43.4%); MCA2 mean difference 0.03 favoring hump reduction (p=0.019); MCA1 not significant (p=0.52) [42418006]
  • Isotretinoin and rhinoplasty, 5 articles (median 24 patients): postoperative use in all, preoperative in 2; 2 of 3 prospective studies positive (less acne, thinner skin, higher satisfaction); retrospective mixed, including more complications; TikTok hashtags 68.5 million views, 100 reels reviewed, 90% patient self-reports, 10% physicians [41184659]
  • Piezo vs conventional osteotomy, 19 RCTs (n=905): mucosal integrity loss 0 piezo cases (RR 0.09); edema lower at POD2 and POD7; ecchymosis lower at POD1, 2, 7; osteotomy time not different [42013314]
  • Cadaveric rib preparations vs autologous, 7 studies (n=1,184): irradiated resorption RR 4.595; alcohol-preserved warping RR 0.106; fresh-frozen not different; infection RR 0.701; operative time -66.56 min [42681592]
  • Ethnicity-conscious rhinoplasty, 17 studies: satisfaction SMD 0.68; complications 8.7% vs 17.4%; revisions 5.3% vs 12.1% [40906288]
  • BDD in Asian rhinoplasty seekers, 15 studies (n=1,977): 30.0% pooled; 36% by BDDQ vs 18% by DSM-V [40907540]
  • Functional measures used across 22 studies (n=2,058): NOSE, SCHNOS-O, VAS-F, SNOT-22, rhinometry; no preservation vs structural difference in controlled data [42532128]
  • Sleep-disordered breathing, 8 studies (n=1,192): NOSE SMD -4.99; Epworth -1.09 (CI crosses 0); PSQI -0.74; FOSQ-10 0.41 [42314704]
  • DPR vs hump reduction PROMs, 6 studies (n=753): VAS-C -0.5215, SCHNOS-C 1.9385 favoring DPR to 6 months; no obstruction difference [40195129]
  • Preoperative desmopressin, 4 RCTs (n=262): blood loss -15.22 mL, I2=0% [40456991]
  • Neural-network similarity (Amazon Rekognition) on 145 Caucasian women from three surgeons' websites: patients 17.58% more similar after primary rhinoplasty (P<.001; lateral 19.17%, oblique 19.02%, frontal 14.38%); within-surgeon similarity rose 30.89% vs 14.15% across surgeons; per surgeon 37.50%, 24.60%, 17.68%; Level 3 [40501168]
  • Blinded raters (public, plastic surgeons, rhinoplasty surgeons), 78 participants: technique identified 52.9% of the time; rhinoplasty surgeons least variable; PROMs equal between cohorts [40331571]
  • Crowdsourced ratings, 30 DPR vs 34 structural: improvement 0.300 vs 0.377; crowd detected surgery in structural noses (r=0.74) but not preserved (r=-0.0554) [39498873]
  • Dorsal aesthetic line width measured by AI, DPR n=30 vs hump resection n=40: midnose width 8.835 to 10.120 mm vs 9.383 to 10.100 mm (P=.089); axis deviation 1.715 to 1.207 and 1.446 to 0.751 degrees [41369038]
  • CT predictors of dorsal preservation success, 43 high-strip cases: shorter nasal bones (r=-0.45, P=.002) and smaller kyphion angle (r=-0.30, P=.049) raised the surgical success score; longer radix-to-bone-tip distance lowered it (r=0.31); 27.9% residual hump at 6 months [40179243]
  • Preferred nasolabial angle, 197 respondents in Canada, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Lebanon (81.2% women, 84.3% aged 20-39): male 97.1 +/- 6.39 degrees, female 109.5 +/- 5.32; male choice varied with age (P=.044) and work status (P=.019), female with age (P=.012) [37738132]
  • Dutch population norms for aesthetic PROMs, weighted n=1,134: Utrecht Questionnaire 6.28, SCHNOS-C 11.38, FACE-Q nose 75.2, nostrils 80.09, NRS 7.67; satisfaction rose with age; non-Western background scored lower (SCHNOS-C OR 0.417, p<0.001) [42670247]
  • NOSE to SCHNOS-O crosswalk by Rasch analysis, 552 patients plus validation sample: intraclass correlation 0.93 both ways [38551458]
  • Rhinoplasty Difficulty Scale, 64 techniques and deformities rated 1-10 by 63 surgeons (32% over 100 cases a year): Rasch reliability 0.96 for surgeons and 0.99 for items; inferior turbinate reduction easiest (1.01), contracted nose after infection hardest (8.24) [42459051]
  • Anatomic classification to replace ethnic labels: projection, rotation, skin thickness and anthropometrics grouped into types [39142701]
  • Caudal septal extension graft laterality, 122 patients at 18 months: side of placement did not change rated tip symmetry on frontal, basal, top-down or lateral views [40875573]
  • Septal extension plus derotation graft in 324 Asian short noses: most stable normalized length and projection (P<.001); revision 6.5% vs 10.6% (SEG only) vs 14.3% (derotation plus strut) [41990353]
  • Secondary bilateral cleft rhinoplasty, 92 patients with 3D anthropometry and panel review of 32 against matched controls: columellar height, bridge length, projection, tip angle, dome height and nostril type improved; complications 4%; upper lip angles unchanged [38314894]
  • Nostril morphology after primary Tajima overcorrection, 146 unilateral cleft patients photographed at 1, 5, 10, 15 and 18 years: asymmetry improved with time; nostril height, width, nasal width and columella angle changed (P<0.01); nostril base height stable [41949992]
  • Preservation principles in 6 cleft infants: Pitanguy ligament release eased tip tension and helped midline alignment of the lower lateral cartilages [40358520]
  • 3D-printed customized silicone implants vs prefabricated for mild dorsal deviation or hump in Asian rhinoplasty: greater improvement in deviation and hump angle by photograph analysis [42154478]
  • In-house 3D planning with printed cutting guides and splints for craniofacial rhinoplasty: guides shaped septal and costochondral grafts; ROE 18 of 24 [39161317]
  • Triangular fossa cartilage harvested with the concha, 14 patients (15 ears), 3D imaging: no change in ear height, width or conchal cavity; mild fossa reduction without visible deformity [41335126]
  • 3D-printed rhinoplasty training model: 53 surgeons, 100% said it helped; 91% rated realism excellent or very good against cadaver; 20 residents improved OSAT 11.7 to 21.6 of 40 (P<.0001) [40129179]
  • Preservation vs structural hump reduction, 4 RCTs (n=419): functional SMD -0.317 (I2 0%) and cosmetic SMD -0.460 (I2 67%) favoring preservation [40227917]
  • Subdorsal strip methods, MSSM 35 vs Z flap 36 at 12 months (mean age 23): NOSE 9.36 with change -4.4, SNOT-22 23.9 with change -16.4, SCHNOS cosmetic change -18.1; no difference between techniques [38648529]
  • Let-down preservation, 52 patients aged 15-69: NOSE, SNOT-22 and SCHNOS improved at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months; Epworth only to 3 months [36282789]
  • Columellar scar by suture type, 6 studies (n=435): no difference on patient or physician ratings [34516890]
  • Serotonergic antidepressants before rhinoplasty, 4,917 matched pairs: readmission RR 1.793, bleeding RR 1.596 at 30 days; revision at 1 year comparable [41672725]

Techniques and terms named

volume projection rotation (VPR) assessment [39187588], delivery / non-delivery approach [39187588], tip-interrupting techniques [39187588], lateral crura classification [42624495], nasal sill classification [39572464], nasolabial angle / Goode's ratio [40854551], MCA1 / MCA2 [42418006], SNOT-22 [42418006], NOSE / SCHNOS-O / VAS-F / rhinometry [42532128], Epworth Sleepiness Scale / PSQI / FOSQ-10 [42314704], VAS-C / SCHNOS-C [40195129], isotretinoin ("Accutane rhinoplasty") [41184659], TikTok Scraper [41184659], piezoelectric osteotomy [42013314], GRADE / ROB-2 [42013314], fresh-frozen / irradiated / alcohol-preserved costal cartilage [42681592], ROBINS-I [42681592], Body Dysmorphic Disorder Questionnaire / DSM-V [40907540], ethnicity-conscious rhinoplasty [40906288], desmopressin (DDAVP) [40456991], Newcastle-Ottawa / RoB 2.0 [42418006], neural-network facial similarity [40501168], surgeon signature effect [40501168], blinded rater identification [40331571], crowdsourced rating [39498873], AI dorsal aesthetic line width [41369038], kyphion angle and nasal bone length on CT [40179243], overall surgical success score [40179243], preferred nasolabial angle by population [37738132], Utrecht Questionnaire and Dutch PROM norms [42670247], NOSE-SCHNOS-O crosswalk [38551458], Rhinoplasty Difficulty Scale [42459051], anatomic (non-ethnic) nose classification [39142701], caudal septal extension graft laterality [40875573], septal extension plus derotation graft [41990353], 3D anthropometry and panel assessment [38314894], Tajima overcorrection morphology [41949992], Pitanguy ligament in infants [40358520], 3D-printed customized silicone implant [42154478], 3D-printed cutting guides [39161317], triangular fossa graft 3D ear analysis [41335126], 3D-printed training model and OSAT [40129179], modified subdorsal strip and Z flap [38648529], let-down PROMs [36282789], columellar suture meta-analysis [34516890], serotonergic antidepressant risk [41672725]

Numbers to remember

  • 19,643 patients analyzed by VPR; 12.3% revision over 20 years [39187588]
  • 68.5 million TikTok views for isotretinoin nose claims vs 5 clinical articles [41184659]
  • MCA2 mean difference 0.03 favoring hump reduction, p=0.019 [42418006]
  • BDD 30.0% pooled in 1,977 Asian candidates [40907540]
  • NOSE SMD -4.99 in sleep-disordered breathing, n=1,192 [42314704]
  • Homologous rib saves 66.56 min of operating time [42681592]
  • Patients 17.58% more alike after primary rhinoplasty; within-surgeon 30.89% vs across 14.15%, n=145 [40501168]
  • Raters correct 52.9%; crowd r=0.74 structural vs -0.06 preserved [40331571, 39498873]
  • Preferred nasolabial angle 97.1 (male) and 109.5 (female) degrees, n=197 [37738132]
  • Population norms: FACE-Q nose 75.2, SCHNOS-C 11.38, n=1,134 [42670247]
  • Difficulty scale 1.01 (turbinate reduction) to 8.24 (contracted nose), 63 surgeons [42459051]
  • Residual hump 27.9% at 6 months; shorter nasal bones predict success, n=43 [40179243]

Numbers

Measure Value Population / study PMID
Minor revision over 20 years, closed tip surgery by VPR 12.3% 19,643 patients [39187588]
Revision rate, lateral crura algorithm 4% 50 patients [42624495]
Revision rate, Asian short nose by technique 6.5% SEG+DG vs 10.6% SEG vs 14.3% DG+strut 324 patients [41990353]
Revision rate, ethnicity-conscious vs conventional 5.3% vs 12.1% 17 studies [40906288]
Residual hump at 6 months, high-strip DPR 27.9% 43 patients with CT [40179243]
Complications, secondary bilateral cleft rhinoplasty 4% 92 patients [38314894]
Complication rate, ethnicity-conscious vs conventional 8.7% vs 17.4% 17 studies [40906288]
Late complications, DPR vs hump reduction OR 0.21 1,364 patients [42418006]
Mucosal integrity loss, piezo vs osteotome RR 0.09 905 patients [42013314]
Readmission with serotonergic antidepressants RR 1.793 4,917 pairs [41672725]
Full satisfaction, closed tip surgery 88.7% 19,643 patients [39187588]
Satisfaction, lateral crura algorithm 90% significant improvement 50 patients [42624495]
Satisfaction SMD, ethnicity-conscious rhinoplasty 0.68 17 studies [40906288]
Functional and cosmetic PROM, preservation vs structural SMD -0.317 and -0.460 4 RCTs, 419 patients [40227917]
SCHNOS cosmetic change, subdorsal strip DPR -18.1 at 12 months 71 patients [38648529]
ROE, 3D-guided craniofacial rhinoplasty 18 of 24 Preliminary report [39161317]
OSAT after one 3D-model session 11.7 to 21.6 of 40 20 residents [40129179]
Population norm, FACE-Q nose 75.2 1,134 Dutch adults [42670247]
Raters identifying the technique 52.9% correct 78 participants [40331571]
Post-surgical facial similarity increase 17.58% 145 patients, 3 surgeons [40501168]
Preferred nasolabial angle, male and female 97.1 and 109.5 degrees 197 respondents [37738132]
BDD prevalence, Asian candidates 30.0% 1,977 patients [40907540]

What is still contested or missing

  • Isotretinoin evidence is small and mixed while online claims are widespread [41184659]
  • Airway cross-section favored hump reduction while late complications favored preservation; authors call significance questionable [42418006]
  • BDD prevalence depends on instrument; standardized diagnostic protocol lacking [40907540]
  • ASJ 30-year reflection [42455863] and the Saman/Saban commentary [38648531] are title-only on file [42455863, 38648531]
  • The homogenizing effect was measured on website photographs selected by the surgeons themselves [40501168]
  • Preferred nasolabial angles come from 197 mostly young female respondents in four countries [37738132]
  • Dutch PROM norms may not transfer to other populations; non-Western respondents scored lower within the same panel [42670247]
  • The difficulty scale reflects 63 surgeons' opinions, not measured outcomes [42459051]
  • 3D-printed implant comparison reports no counts, follow-up or complications in the abstract [42154478]

Papers used

  • Armanfar S et al.. Piezoelectric Versus Conventional Rhinoplasty: A GRADE-Assessed Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Aesthet Surg J 2026. PMID 42013314. DOI 10.1093/asj/sjag082
  • Kosins A et al.. Reflections on the Evolution of Rhinoplasty and Aesthetic Surgery Journal Over 30 Years. Aesthet Surg J 2026. PMID 42455863. DOI 10.1093/asj/sjag040 (title only)
  • Fanning JE et al.. Clarifying the Role of Isotretinoin in Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Analysis of an Emerging Social Media Trend. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2026. PMID 41184659. DOI 10.1007/s00266-025-05342-5
  • Khatib M et al.. Comparison of Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty and Dorsal Hump Reduction Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Postoperative Outcomes. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2026. PMID 42418006. DOI 10.1007/s00266-026-06105-6
  • Hashemipour Y, Danesh HA. Ethnic Considerations in Rhinoplasty: A Meta-Analysis of Outcomes and Complications in Caucasian Versus Non-Caucasian Patients. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2026. PMID 40906288. DOI 10.1007/s00266-025-05189-w
  • Ozgenc I et al.. Comparative Outcomes of Septal Extension versus Columellar Strut Grafts for Nasal Tip Stabilization and Positioning in Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Facial Plast Surg 2026. PMID 40854551. DOI 10.1055/a-2689-1496
  • Chan C et al.. Functional Outcomes of Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Facial Plast Surg 2026. PMID 42532128. DOI 10.1055/a-2927-6789
  • Ang LF et al.. Impact of Functional Rhinoplasty on Sleep-Disordered Breathing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Facial Plast Surg 2026. PMID 42314704. DOI 10.1055/a-2891-4516
  • Tanvar S, Basu R. Management of Lateral Crura Deformity in Functional and Aesthetic Rhinoplasty: Classification, Surgical Algorithm, and Outcome-Based Approach. Facial Plast Surg 2026. PMID 42624495. DOI 10.1055/a-2940-5266
  • Chua NYM et al.. The Mirror of Culture: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Prevalence of Body Dysmorphic Disorder in Asian Rhinoplasty Seekers. Facial Plast Surg 2026. PMID 40907540. DOI 10.1055/a-2689-1653
  • Wael Moftah A et al.. Different Preparations of Cadaveric Costal Cartilage Compared to Autologous Rib Cartilage in Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2026. PMID 42681592. DOI 10.1177/26893614261483359
  • Saman M, Saban Y. Invited Commentary: "Comparison of Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty Techniques: Functional and Aesthetic Review of Subdorsal Septal Strip Methods" by Barrera. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2026. PMID 38648531. DOI 10.1089/fpsam.2024.0101 (title only)
  • Xia Y et al.. A Novel Classification of Nasal Sill Morphology Provides Strategies for Secondary Cleft Rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2025. PMID 39572464. DOI 10.1007/s00266-024-04526-9
  • Scattolin A et al.. Algorithm for the Treatment of Tip Malformation Combining a Clinical Qualitative Assessment and Specific Closed-Rhinoplasty Techniques Based on Retrospective Analysis of Pellegrini's Fellows 40 Years' Experience. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2025. PMID 39187588. DOI 10.1007/s00266-024-04310-9
  • Kim DH et al.. Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes Between Dorsal Preservation and Conventional Dorsal Hump Reduction Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2025. PMID 40195129. DOI 10.1007/s00266-025-04828-6
  • Gutierrez RWH et al.. Preoperative Desmopressin for Bleeding Reduction During Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2025. PMID 40456991. DOI 10.1007/s00266-025-04916-7
  • Khaw KL, Lu SM. One Profile to Rule Them All? A Neural Network Analysis of the Homogenizing Effect of Primary Rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J 2025. PMID 40501168. DOI 10.1093/asj/sjaf109
  • McCleary S et al.. Dorsal Preservation versus Open Structural Rhinoplasty: Can We Tell the Difference between Aesthetic and Functional Outcomes?. Plast Reconstr Surg 2025. PMID 40331571. DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000012050
  • Alford JA et al.. Crowdsourced Assessment of Aesthetic Outcomes of Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J 2025. PMID 39498873. DOI 10.1093/asj/sjae221
  • Xu L et al.. Postoperative Differences in Dorsal Aesthetic Lines in Patients Undergoing Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty and Conventional Hump Resection. Aesthet Surg J 2026. PMID 41369038. DOI 10.1093/asj/sjaf255
  • Kemal Ö et al.. Radiological and Anatomical Parameters as Determinants of Success in Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J 2025. PMID 40179243. DOI 10.1093/asj/sjaf050
  • Alshawaf SM et al.. Preferred Nasolabial Angle in Rhinoplasty: A Cross-Sectional Analysis. Aesthet Surg J 2024. PMID 37738132. DOI 10.1093/asj/sjad309
  • Kasapov M et al.. Establishing Normative Data on Satisfaction with Nasal Appearance: a Dutch Population-Based Study Using Aesthetic Rhinoplasty Outcome Instruments. Aesthet Surg J 2026. PMID 42670247. DOI 10.1093/asj/sjag177
  • van Zijl FVWJ et al.. The Rhinoplasty Rosetta Stone: Using Rasch Analysis to Create and Validate Crosswalks between the NOSE and the SCHNOS Functional Subscale. Plast Reconstr Surg 2024. PMID 38551458. DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000011438
  • Toriumi DM et al.. Rhinoplasty Difficulty Scale: Development and Psychometric Analysis of a Surgeon's Assessment of Rhinoplasty Technique and Nasal Deformity Correction. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2026. PMID 42459051. DOI 10.1177/26893614261464778
  • Hall DB et al.. Bringing Inclusivity to "Ethnic" Rhinoplasty: A Novel Anatomical Classification System. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2025. PMID 39142701. DOI 10.1089/fpsam.2023.0366
  • McCleary S et al.. Does Laterality of the Caudal Septal Extension Graft Matter? A Photograph-Based Analysis of Symmetry in Rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2026. PMID 40875573. DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000012408
  • Huang CJ et al.. Efficacy of Combined Septal Extension and Derotation Grafts in Asian Rhinoplasty: A Quantitative Analysis of Tip Projection and Stability. Aesthet Surg J 2026. PMID 41990353. DOI 10.1093/asj/sjag079
  • Saito T et al.. Secondary Bilateral Cleft Rhinoplasty: Achieving an Aesthetic Result. Aesthet Surg J 2024. PMID 38314894. DOI 10.1093/asj/sjae019
  • Huang CW et al.. Nasal Morphological Changes after Facial Maturation in Patients with Unilateral Cleft Lip Following Primary Overcorrected Rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2026. PMID 41949992. DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000013104
  • Tanikawa D et al.. Introducing Preservation Rhinoplasty Principles to Cleft Nasal Surgery: Unveiling the Role of Nasal Ligaments in Infant Anatomy. Plast Reconstr Surg 2026. PMID 40358520. DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000012197
  • Kim TK et al.. Comparison of Customized and Prefabricated Silicone Implants in Asian Rhinoplasty Using 3D Technology. Plast Reconstr Surg 2026. PMID 42154478. DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000013208
  • Rubio-Palau J et al.. In-House Virtual Planning and 3D-Printed Surgical Guides for Reconstructive Rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J 2025. PMID 39161317. DOI 10.1093/asj/sjae179
  • Huang CJ et al.. Triangular Fossa Cartilage Graft in Rhinoplasty: A Three-Dimensional Anatomical and Technical Feasibility Study. Plast Reconstr Surg 2025. PMID 41335126. DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000012647
  • Rehman U et al.. Bridging the Gap in Rhinoplasty Training: The Effectiveness of 3D Printed Models in Surgical Education. Aesthet Surg J 2025. PMID 40129179. DOI 10.1093/asj/sjaf045
  • Shim SR et al.. Preservation Rhinoplasty Versus Structural Rhinoplasty in Dorsal Hump Reduction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2025. PMID 40227917. DOI 10.1089/fpsam.2024.0382
  • Barrera JE. Comparison of Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty Techniques: Functional and Aesthetic Review of Subdorsal Septal Strip Methods. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2024. PMID 38648529. DOI 10.1089/fpsam.2023.0191
  • Sozansky Lujan J et al.. Functional and Aesthetic Outcomes of Let Down Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2023. PMID 36282789. DOI 10.1089/fpsam.2022.0019
  • Kenny H et al.. Columellar Scar Following Open Rhinoplasty Using Absorbable Suture Versus Nonabsorbable Suture: A Meta-Analysis. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2023. PMID 34516890. DOI 10.1089/fpsam.2021.0215
  • Zontag N et al.. Preoperative Serotonin Antidepressants Are Associated With Increased Postoperative Complications Following Rhinoplasty: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis. Aesthet Surg J 2026. PMID 41672725. DOI 10.1093/asj/sjag043

Written by rhinoplasty.cc, 2026-09-08, from the PubMed abstracts; not medical advice.

Start here

The 40 papers the synthesis above was written from.

  1. ASJ
    2026PMID 42013314Summary
  2. ASJ
    2026PMID 42455863
  3. APS
    2026PMID 41184659Summary
  4. APS
    2026PMID 42418006Summary
  5. APS
    2026PMID 40906288Summary
  6. FPS
    2026PMID 40854551Summary
  7. FPS
    2026PMID 42532128Summary
  8. FPS
    2026PMID 42314704Summary
  9. FPS
    2026PMID 42624495Summary
  10. FPS
    2026PMID 40907540Summary
  11. FPSAM
    2026PMID 42681592Summary
  12. FPSAM
    2026PMID 38648531
  13. APS
    2025PMID 39572464Summary
  14. APS
    2025PMID 39187588Summary
  15. APS
    2025PMID 40195129Summary
  16. APS
    2025PMID 40456991Summary
  17. ASJ
    2025PMID 40501168Summary
  18. PRS
    2025PMID 40331571Summary
  19. ASJ
    2025PMID 39498873Summary
  20. ASJ
    2026PMID 41369038Summary
  21. ASJ
    2025PMID 40179243Summary
  22. ASJ
    2024PMID 37738132Summary
  23. ASJ
    2026PMID 42670247Summary
  24. PRS
    2024PMID 38551458Summary
  25. FPSAM
    2026PMID 42459051Summary
  26. FPSAM
    2025PMID 39142701Summary
  27. PRS
    2026PMID 40875573Summary
  28. ASJ
    2026PMID 41990353Summary
  29. ASJ
    2024PMID 38314894Summary
  30. PRS
    2026PMID 41949992Summary
  31. PRS
    2026PMID 40358520Summary
  32. PRS
    2026PMID 42154478Summary
  33. ASJ
    2025PMID 39161317Summary
  34. PRS
    2025PMID 41335126Summary
  35. ASJ
    2025PMID 40129179Summary
  36. FPSAM
    2025PMID 40227917Summary
  37. FPSAM
    2024PMID 38648529Summary
  38. FPSAM
    2023PMID 36282789Summary
  39. FPSAM
    2023PMID 34516890Summary
  40. ASJ
    2026PMID 41672725Summary

Related topics

61

Outcomes, satisfaction and psychology

61 of the 325 papers here also match this topic.

Open topic
54

Dorsum and hump

54 of the 325 papers here also match this topic.

Open topic
47

Septum, valve and airway

47 of the 325 papers here also match this topic.

Open topic
42

Preservation rhinoplasty

42 of the 325 papers here also match this topic.

Open topic

Every paper, by year

325 papers. The 40 Start here papers are not repeated.

202645 papers · 21 above
  1. APS
    PMID 42329445Summary
  2. APS
    PMID 40770501Summary
  3. APS
    PMID 42303768Summary
  4. APS
    PMID 41136704Summary
  5. APS
    PMID 42159722Summary
  6. APS
    PMID 42547595Summary
  7. APS
    PMID 42581097Summary
  8. APS
    PMID 41263986Summary
  9. APS
    PMID 42547597Summary
  10. APS
    PMID 40775193Summary
  11. FPS
    PMID 40527484Summary
  12. FPS
    PMID 41794044Summary
  13. FPS
    PMID 40345244Summary
  14. FPS
    PMID 41265885Summary
  15. FPSAM
    PMID 40100947
  16. FPSAM
    Rhinoplasty Revisions: Aesthetic Surgery as a Risk Factor
    Majeethia H, Gorelik D, Mehdi Z et al.
    PMID 41630385
  17. PRS
    PMID 42312605
  18. PRS
    PMID 41930748
  19. PRS
    PMID 41427759
  20. PRS
    PMID 41677802
  21. PRS-GO
    PMID 42028104Summary
  22. PRS-GO
    PMID 41541245Summary
  23. PRS-GO
    PMID 42376269Summary
  24. PRS-GO
    PMID 42517059Summary
202536 papers · 13 above
  1. APS
    PMID 39322839Summary
  2. APS
    PMID 40259065Summary
  3. APS
    PMID 39948321Summary
  4. APS
    PMID 38488907Summary
  5. APS
    PMID 40389737Summary
  6. FPS
    PMID 38925158
  7. FPS
    PMID 38547913Summary
  8. FPS
    Precision Rhinoplasty Cylindric Burrs-Sidewall Aesthetics
    Ilhan E, Arancibia-Tagle D, Özay H et al.
    PMID 38698637Summary
  9. FPS
    PMID 38599617Summary
  10. FPS
    PMID 39447621Summary
  11. FPS
    PMID 39038800Summary
  12. FPSAM
    3D Smartphone Photography During Rhinoplasty Surgery
    Youssefi I, Obermeyer IP, Kim S et al.
    PMID 39463383Full text
  13. FPSAM
    PMID 38621185
  14. FPSAM
    PMID 39142700
  15. FPSAM
    PMID 39463426
  16. FPSAM
    PMID 39636439
  17. FPS Clin
    PMID 40253100Summary
  18. PRS
    PMID 40865067
  19. PRS
    PMID 40996919
  20. PRS-GO
    PMID 40765688Full text
  21. PRS-GO
    PMID 40212098Summary
  22. PRS-GO
    PMID 40771258Summary
  23. PRS-GO
    PMID 40995575Summary
202420 papers · 4 above
  1. APS
    PMID 37430011Summary
  2. APS
    PMID 38575764Summary
  3. APS
    PMID 38587673
  4. APS
    PMID 38839614Summary
  5. APS
    PMID 38839611Summary
  6. APS
    PMID 38332054
  7. APS
    PMID 37173413Summary
  8. APS
    PMID 38097691Summary
  9. APS
    PMID 38443745Summary
  10. APS
    PMID 38777929Summary
  11. FPS
    PMID 38151040Summary
  12. FPS
    PMID 37433308
  13. FPS
    PMID 38471660Summary
  14. FPSAM
    PMID 38197856
  15. PRS
    PMID 39480255
  16. PRS-GO
    PMID 39507311Summary
202331 papers · 2 above
  1. ASJ
    PMID 36594157Summary
  2. ASJ
    PMID 36656674Summary
  3. ASJ
    PMID 36752982
  4. ASJ
    PMID 36793242
  5. ASJ
    PMID 36633571
  6. ASJ
    PMID 36478029Summary
  7. ASJ
    PMID 36402140Full text
  8. APS
    PMID 36826521Summary
  9. APS
    PMID 37095384Summary
  10. APS
    PMID 37328654Summary
  11. APS
    PMID 36302983Summary
  12. APS
    PMID 37640816Summary
  13. APS
    PMID 36071242Summary
  14. APS
    PMID 37169892
  15. APS
    PMID 36651982Full text
  16. FPS
    PMID 36283415Summary
  17. FPS
    PMID 36972604Summary
  18. FPS
    PMID 36596465Summary
  19. FPSAM
    PMID 35506909
  20. FPSAM
    PMID 36282776
  21. FPSAM
    PMID 36048532
  22. FPSAM
    PMID 36083277
  23. FPSAM
    PMID 36976783Summary
  24. PRS
    PMID 36827472Summary
  25. PRS
    PMID 36723632Summary
  26. PRS
    PMID 36877627Summary
  27. PRS
    PMID 36729781Summary
  28. PRS-GO
    PMID 37744773Summary
  29. PRS-GO
    PMID 37124390Summary
202229 papers
  1. ASJ
    PMID 34546291
  2. ASJ
    PMID 34436559Summary
  3. ASJ
    PMID 34864854Summary
  4. APS
    Aesthetic Science of Rhinoplasty: Three Principles
    Gruber RP, Holland M, Rochlin D et al.
    PMID 35441238Summary
  5. APS
    PMID 34498142Summary
  6. APS
    PMID 35099579Summary
  7. APS
    PMID 34498143Summary
  8. APS
    PMID 34676430Full text
  9. APS
    PMID 35437664Summary
  10. APS
    PMID 35031825Summary
  11. APS
    PMID 34498141Summary
  12. APS
    PMID 35641688Summary
  13. CPS
    PMID 34782131Summary
  14. FPS
    PMID 34051703Summary
  15. FPS
    PMID 33990128Summary
  16. FPS
    PMID 35130565Summary
  17. FPS
    Three-Dimensional Technology in Rhinoplasty
    De Greve G, Malka R, Barnett E et al.
    PMID 35114707Summary
  18. FPSAM
    PMID 33844930Summary
  19. FPSAM
    PMID 35172105Summary
  20. FPSAM
    PMID 35167351
  21. FPSAM
    PMID 34591713Summary
  22. FPSAM
    PMID 34357798Summary
  23. FPSAM
    PMID 34166107Summary
  24. FPSAM
    PMID 33847511Summary
  25. FPS Clin
    PMID 35501050Summary
  26. PRS
    PMID 35960925
  27. PRS
    PMID 35139046Summary
  28. PRS-GO
    PMID 35141100Full text
  29. PRS-GO
    PMID 36448013Summary
202124 papers
  1. ASJ
    PMID 33581695Summary
  2. ASJ
    PMID 33675636
  3. ASJ
    PMID 33590830Full text
  4. ASJ
    PMID 33945612Summary
  5. ASJ
    PMID 33674857Summary
  6. APS
    PMID 34075458Summary
  7. APS
    PMID 33598741Summary
  8. APS
    PMID 33432387Summary
  9. APS
    PMID 33758978
  10. APS
    PMID 32747985Summary
  11. APS
    PMID 33660016
  12. APS
    PMID 33855581Full text
  13. APS
    PMID 33758974Summary
  14. FPS
    PMID 33648013Summary
  15. FPS
    PMID 33506451Summary
  16. FPS
    Which Lighting Option Is the Best for Photography in Rhinoplasty?
    Fernández-Pellón R, Saghir M, Jaber A et al.
    PMID 33742427Summary
  17. FPSAM
    PMID 32716730Summary
  18. FPSAM
    PMID 32614619Summary
  19. PRS
    PMID 34550929
  20. PRS
    PMID 34644278Summary
  21. PRS
    PMID 33565827Summary
  22. PRS
    PMID 33764912
  23. PRS
    PMID 34550928Summary
  24. PRS
    PMID 34270513Summary
202029 papers
  1. ASJ
    PMID 32756944Summary
  2. ASJ
    PMID 32232381
  3. ASJ
    PMID 31675056
  4. ASJ
    PMID 32064498Summary
  5. ASJ
    PMID 31960890Summary
  6. APS
    PMID 31832733Summary
  7. APS
    PMID 31463565Summary
  8. APS
    PMID 32514639Summary
  9. APS
    PMID 32500323
  10. APS
    PMID 32198639Summary
  11. APS
    PMID 32383002Summary
  12. APS
    PMID 31637501
  13. APS
    PMID 32072215
  14. APS
    PMID 32524196
  15. APS
    PMID 31832736Summary
  16. APS
    Psychological Analysis of Non-surgical Rhinoplasty
    Di Rosa L, Cerulli G, De Pasquale A
    PMID 31768580Summary
  17. APS
    PMID 32410198Summary
  18. FPS
    PMID 32557440Summary
  19. FPS
    PMID 33429440Full text
  20. FPS
    PMID 32092768Summary
  21. FPSAM
    PMID 32380871Summary
  22. PRS
    PMID 31985623Summary
  23. PRS
    PMID 31985624
  24. PRS
    PMID 32332543
  25. PRS
    PMID 32332542Summary
  26. PRS
    Rhinoplasty Using Three-Dimensional Analysis and Simulation
    Singh A, Maniskas SA, Bruckman KC et al.
    PMID 32221210Summary
  27. PRS
    PMID 32097325Summary
  28. PRS
    PMID 32459772Summary
  29. PRS-GO
    PMID 32309081Summary
201918 papers
  1. ASJ
    PMID 31145779
  2. ASJ
    PMID 30722008Summary
  3. ASJ
    PMID 29982464Summary
  4. APS
    PMID 30560283Summary
  5. APS
    PMID 30706084Summary
  6. APS
    PMID 30498936Summary
  7. APS
    PMID 30868305Summary
  8. FPS
    PMID 31470467
  9. JAMA FPS
    PMID 30489601Summary
  10. JAMA FPS
    PMID 30489608
  11. JAMA FPS
    PMID 30605219Summary
  12. PRS
    PMID 31568293
  13. PRS
    PMID 30531619Summary
  14. PRS
    PMID 31348378
  15. PRS
    PMID 31568292Summary
  16. PRS
    PMID 30921158
  17. PRS-GO
    PMID 30881815Full text
  18. PRS-GO
    PMID 30859032Summary
201817 papers
  1. ASJ
    PMID 29394320
  2. ASJ
    PMID 29490020Full text
  3. ASJ
    PMID 29365051Summary
  4. APS
    PMID 30019242Summary
  5. APS
    PMID 29789868Summary
  6. APS
    PMID 29717338Summary
  7. FPS
    PMID 29631292
  8. FPS
    Postoperative Care in Aesthetic Rhinoplasty Patients
    Apaydin F, Stanic L, Unadkat S et al.
    PMID 30593070Summary
  9. FPS
    PMID 29466810Summary
  10. JAMA FPS
    PMID 29710239
  11. JAMA FPS
    PMID 30326520Summary
  12. PRS
    PMID 29135891Summary
  13. PRS
    PMID 30252826
  14. PRS
    PMID 29369988Summary
  15. PRS
    Three-Dimensional Printing in Rhinoplasty
    Suszynski TM, Serra JM, Weissler JM et al.
    PMID 29794699Summary
  16. PRS-GO
    PMID 30349780Summary
  17. PRS-GO
    PMID 29616168Summary
201717 papers
  1. ASJ
    PMID 29025221
  2. ASJ
    PMID 28364535
  3. ASJ
    PMID 28472446Summary
  4. ASJ
    PMID 28520846Summary
  5. ASJ
    PMID 28364534Summary
  6. APS
    PMID 28432415Summary
  7. FPS
    PMID 28388802Summary
  8. FPS
    PMID 28962054
  9. FPS
    PMID 29195250Summary
  10. FPS
    PMID 28571070Summary
  11. FPS
    PMID 28571072Summary
  12. FPS
    PMID 29195249
  13. FPS Clin
    PMID 28340646Summary
  14. JAMA FPS
    PMID 28715530Summary
  15. PRS
    PMID 28654592Summary
  16. PRS
    PMID 28234832Summary
  17. PRS-GO
    PMID 29062632Summary
201622 papers
  1. ASJ
    PMID 27277274Summary
  2. ASJ
    PMID 27535924
  3. ASJ
    PMID 26063834Summary
  4. ASJ
    PMID 26773090Summary
  5. APS
    PMID 26893278Summary
  6. CPS
    PMID 26616712Summary
  7. FPS
    PMID 28033632Summary
  8. FPS
    Columellar Aesthetics in Open Rhinoplasty
    Kridel RW, Kwak ES, Watson JB
    PMID 27494576Summary
  9. FPS
    PMID 26862968Summary
  10. FPS
    PMID 27494585Summary
  11. FPS
    PMID 26862969Summary
  12. JAMA FPS
    PMID 27441889Summary
  13. JAMA FPS
    PMID 26605763
  14. JAMA FPS
    PMID 26660141Summary
  15. JAMA FPS
    PMID 26868130Summary
  16. PRS
    PMID 26710007Summary
  17. PRS
    PMID 26818321Summary
  18. PRS
    Digital Imaging in Secondary Rhinoplasty
    Lehrman CR, Lee MR, Ramanadham S et al.
    PMID 27219263Summary
  19. PRS
    PMID 27879585Summary
  20. PRS-GO
    PMID 27536499Summary
  21. PRS-GO
    PMID 27014540Summary
  22. PRS-GO
    PMID 27482491Summary
20155 papers
  1. ASJ
    PMID 25805279
  2. ASJ
    Rhinoplasty: the nasal bones - anatomy and analysis
    Lazovic GD, Daniel RK, Janosevic LB et al.
    PMID 25805278Summary
  3. ASJ
    PMID 25568232Summary
  4. APS
    PMID 26195129Summary
  5. JAMA FPS
    PMID 25429595Summary
201411 papers
  1. ASJ
    PMID 25158684Summary
  2. ASJ
    PMID 24936094Summary
  3. FPS
    PMID 25076456Summary
  4. JAMA FPS
    PMID 24177341Summary
  5. PRS
    PMID 25068321
  6. PRS
    PMID 24469162
  7. PRS
    PMID 24374691
  8. PRS
    PMID 24374692
  9. PRS
    PMID 24374710Summary
  10. PRS
    PMID 24469161Summary
  11. PRS
    PMID 25068320Summary
20138 papers
  1. ASJ
    PMID 23515381
  2. ASJ
    Rhinoplasty: surface aesthetics and surgical techniques
    Çakir B, Doğan T, Öreroğlu AR et al.
    PMID 23515380Summary
  3. FPS
    PMID 23564242Summary
  4. PRS
    PMID 24076670Summary
  5. PRS
    PMID 24281638Summary
  6. PRS
    PMID 24076671
  7. PRS
    PMID 24281624
  8. PRS
    PMID 23249985Summary
20126 papers
  1. APS
    PMID 21993578Summary
  2. APS
    PMID 22527586Summary
  3. Arch FPS
    PMID 22710526Summary
  4. Arch FPS
    PMID 22986942Summary
  5. FPS
    PMID 22872555Summary
  6. PRS
    PMID 22777038Summary
20117 papers
  1. ASJ
    PMID 21908809Summary
  2. ASJ
    PMID 21813878Summary
  3. ASJ
    PMID 22001343Summary
  4. APS
    PMID 21487908Summary
  5. FPS
    PMID 21404157Summary
  6. FPS Clin
    PMID 22004862Summary
  7. PRS
    PMID 21701345Summary