Download PDF
CC BY-NC 4.0 · Arch Plast Surg 2019; 46(03): 282-284
DOI: 10.5999/aps.2018.01263
Idea and Innovation

Design of a combined cartilage graft crusher, morselizer and holder for use in rhinoplasty

Jonas Röjdmark 
Department of Plastic Surgery, Akademikliniken Clinic, Stockholm, Sweden
,
Mubashir Cheema
Department of Plastic Surgery, Akademikliniken Clinic, Stockholm, Sweden
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

A combined cartilage holder and crusher is described that allows the surgeon to hold, crush, morselize, and suture a single piece or stack of cartilage graft without letting it slip. The customized slit-shaped jaws allow adequate room for the suture needle, while the serrated surfaces hold the cartilage firmly. The use of this instrument is advocated primarily in rhinoplasty for manipulating and suturing a small cartilage graft or a stack of grafts. The use of this instrument may be extended to aesthetic or reconstructive cases where cartilage grafts need to be sutured or shaped, as in eyelid, ear, and nipple reconstruction.

Keywords

Rhinoplasty - Cartilage graft - Shield graft


Publication History

Received: 22 October 2018

Accepted: 09 March 2019

Article published online:
28 March 2022

© 2019. The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, permitting unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Perkins SW. The evolution of the combined use of endonasal and external columellar approaches to rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2004; 12: 35-50
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Daniel RK. Rhinoplasty: the first 100 Daniel RK. Rhinoplasty. 1st ed. Boston: Little Brown; 1993: 321-80
  • 3 Constantian MB. Constantian’s approach Gunter JP, Rohrich RJ, Adams Jr WP. Dallas rhinoplasty: nasal surgery by the masters. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Quality Medical; 2007: 1465-502
  • 4 Simons RL, Grunebaum LD. The endonasal approach to rhinoplasty Stucker FJ, de Souza C, Kenyon Jr GS. et al. Rhinology and facial plastic surgery. 1st ed. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2009: 713-21
  • 5 Cafferty A, Becker DG. Open and closed rhinoplasty. Clin Plast Surg 2016; 43: 17-27
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Tebbetts JB. Open and closed rhinoplasty (minus the “versus”): analyzing processes. Aesthet Surg J 2006; 26: 456-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Sheen JH. Closed versus open rhinoplasty--and the debate goes on. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997; 99: 859-62
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Chandawarkar RY, Cervino AL, Wells MD. Reconstruction of nasal defects using modified composite grafts. Br J Plast Surg 2003; 56: 26-32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Silva BS, Dolci JE. Experimental study of the use of auricular cartilage with and without Gelfoam® on the nasal dorsum of rabbits. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2014; 80: 111-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar