Anzeige
Erschienen in:
18.04.2022 | Original Article
Long-Term Outcomes of Secondary Nasal Tip Plasty After Degradation of a Polycaprolactone (PCL) Mesh
Erschienen in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery | Ausgabe 5/2022
Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhaltenAbstract
Background
In secondary nasal tip plasty, it is often difficult to harvest appropriate septal extension grafts for sufficient tip projection. Therefore, studies using numerous alloplastic materials in rhinoplasty have been reported. This study aimed to evaluate the nasal tip change over time after tip plasty using a PCL mesh.
Methods
We conducted a retrospective study of 86 Asian patients who received secondary tip plasty by septal extension grafting with a PCL mesh as a batten graft. Patient demographics and surgical outcomes were examined. The outcome variables were nasolabial angle, nasofrontal angle and Goode ratio. Measurements were performed with photographs obtained at short-term (postoperative 4-6 months) and long-term (more than postoperative 24 months) follow-ups. Aesthetic outcomes and safety were assessed using the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale.
Results
Among 86 patients, 56 had a long-term follow-up. The mean age was 33.33 years, and the male-to-female ratio was 17.44:82.56. The nasolabial and nasofrontal angles did not change significantly between the short-term and long-term follow-ups. The Goode ratio, which is a useful tool to evaluate nasal projection, was decreased by 5.00%. Nevertheless, all patients were satisfied, and the long-term aesthetic outcomes were improved in 54 (96.4%) patients. There were two cases (2.33%) of complications, including one infection and one case of PCL-mesh protrusion.
Conclusions
The present study demonstrated the usefulness and safety of PCL meshes when used in septal extension grafts as batten grafts. Although biodegradation seems to affect the nasal projection, PCL is still useful in secondary tip plasty along with other alloplastic materials.
Level of Evidence IV
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.