Digital Imaging in Secondary Rhinoplasty

Craig R. Lehrman, Michael R. Lee, Smita Ramanadham, Rod J. Rohrich

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Rhinoplasty remains one of the most commonly performed operations in plastic surgery. Little is known regarding the use of imaging in secondary rhinoplasty. Secondary rhinoplasty is a far more complex operation than primary rhinoplasty. The objective of this study was to assess the role of software imaging in patients undergoing secondary rhinoplasty. Methods: A retrospective review was performed to identify patients undergoing secondary rhinoplasty performed by the senior author (R.J.R.) from January of 2000 to August of 2013. Forty consecutive patients met inclusion criteria. The degree of improvement was graded in comparison with both the preoperative photographs and software imaging using a graded scale. Results: A total of 40 patients met inclusion criteria. There were 35 women (87.5 percent) and five men (12.5 percent). The nasal dorsum was found to have an average rating of 2.36 between the two observers, the midvault had an average rating of 2.65, the nasal tip had an average rating of 2.27, the nasal alae had an average rating of 2.63, and the nasal base had an average score of 2.99 Conclusions: Based on the results of this study, the authors have determined that preoperative digital imaging can provide a reasonable expectation for patients undergoing secondary rhinoplasty. However, digital imaging must be used with caution, as secondary rhinoplasty patients have heightened expectations and unknown anatomy from their previous operation. The nasal tip and dorsum are especially difficult to adequately predict, and this should be discussed with the patient before surgery.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)950e-953e
JournalPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Volume137
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2016

Fingerprint

Rhinoplasty
Nose
Software
Plastic Surgery
Anatomy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Digital Imaging in Secondary Rhinoplasty. / Lehrman, Craig R.; Lee, Michael R.; Ramanadham, Smita; Rohrich, Rod J.

In: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Vol. 137, No. 6, 01.06.2016, p. 950e-953e.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lehrman, Craig R. ; Lee, Michael R. ; Ramanadham, Smita ; Rohrich, Rod J. / Digital Imaging in Secondary Rhinoplasty. In: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 2016 ; Vol. 137, No. 6. pp. 950e-953e.
@article{b0d53fd5bcc648e6a90735fd21d56fbe,
title = "Digital Imaging in Secondary Rhinoplasty",
abstract = "Background: Rhinoplasty remains one of the most commonly performed operations in plastic surgery. Little is known regarding the use of imaging in secondary rhinoplasty. Secondary rhinoplasty is a far more complex operation than primary rhinoplasty. The objective of this study was to assess the role of software imaging in patients undergoing secondary rhinoplasty. Methods: A retrospective review was performed to identify patients undergoing secondary rhinoplasty performed by the senior author (R.J.R.) from January of 2000 to August of 2013. Forty consecutive patients met inclusion criteria. The degree of improvement was graded in comparison with both the preoperative photographs and software imaging using a graded scale. Results: A total of 40 patients met inclusion criteria. There were 35 women (87.5 percent) and five men (12.5 percent). The nasal dorsum was found to have an average rating of 2.36 between the two observers, the midvault had an average rating of 2.65, the nasal tip had an average rating of 2.27, the nasal alae had an average rating of 2.63, and the nasal base had an average score of 2.99 Conclusions: Based on the results of this study, the authors have determined that preoperative digital imaging can provide a reasonable expectation for patients undergoing secondary rhinoplasty. However, digital imaging must be used with caution, as secondary rhinoplasty patients have heightened expectations and unknown anatomy from their previous operation. The nasal tip and dorsum are especially difficult to adequately predict, and this should be discussed with the patient before surgery.",
author = "Lehrman, {Craig R.} and Lee, {Michael R.} and Smita Ramanadham and Rohrich, {Rod J.}",
year = "2016",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/01.prs.0000481836.06127.d5",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "137",
pages = "950e--953e",
journal = "Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery",
issn = "0032-1052",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Digital Imaging in Secondary Rhinoplasty

AU - Lehrman, Craig R.

AU - Lee, Michael R.

AU - Ramanadham, Smita

AU - Rohrich, Rod J.

PY - 2016/6/1

Y1 - 2016/6/1

N2 - Background: Rhinoplasty remains one of the most commonly performed operations in plastic surgery. Little is known regarding the use of imaging in secondary rhinoplasty. Secondary rhinoplasty is a far more complex operation than primary rhinoplasty. The objective of this study was to assess the role of software imaging in patients undergoing secondary rhinoplasty. Methods: A retrospective review was performed to identify patients undergoing secondary rhinoplasty performed by the senior author (R.J.R.) from January of 2000 to August of 2013. Forty consecutive patients met inclusion criteria. The degree of improvement was graded in comparison with both the preoperative photographs and software imaging using a graded scale. Results: A total of 40 patients met inclusion criteria. There were 35 women (87.5 percent) and five men (12.5 percent). The nasal dorsum was found to have an average rating of 2.36 between the two observers, the midvault had an average rating of 2.65, the nasal tip had an average rating of 2.27, the nasal alae had an average rating of 2.63, and the nasal base had an average score of 2.99 Conclusions: Based on the results of this study, the authors have determined that preoperative digital imaging can provide a reasonable expectation for patients undergoing secondary rhinoplasty. However, digital imaging must be used with caution, as secondary rhinoplasty patients have heightened expectations and unknown anatomy from their previous operation. The nasal tip and dorsum are especially difficult to adequately predict, and this should be discussed with the patient before surgery.

AB - Background: Rhinoplasty remains one of the most commonly performed operations in plastic surgery. Little is known regarding the use of imaging in secondary rhinoplasty. Secondary rhinoplasty is a far more complex operation than primary rhinoplasty. The objective of this study was to assess the role of software imaging in patients undergoing secondary rhinoplasty. Methods: A retrospective review was performed to identify patients undergoing secondary rhinoplasty performed by the senior author (R.J.R.) from January of 2000 to August of 2013. Forty consecutive patients met inclusion criteria. The degree of improvement was graded in comparison with both the preoperative photographs and software imaging using a graded scale. Results: A total of 40 patients met inclusion criteria. There were 35 women (87.5 percent) and five men (12.5 percent). The nasal dorsum was found to have an average rating of 2.36 between the two observers, the midvault had an average rating of 2.65, the nasal tip had an average rating of 2.27, the nasal alae had an average rating of 2.63, and the nasal base had an average score of 2.99 Conclusions: Based on the results of this study, the authors have determined that preoperative digital imaging can provide a reasonable expectation for patients undergoing secondary rhinoplasty. However, digital imaging must be used with caution, as secondary rhinoplasty patients have heightened expectations and unknown anatomy from their previous operation. The nasal tip and dorsum are especially difficult to adequately predict, and this should be discussed with the patient before surgery.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84971016582&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84971016582&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/01.prs.0000481836.06127.d5

DO - 10.1097/01.prs.0000481836.06127.d5

M3 - Article

C2 - 27219263

AN - SCOPUS:84971016582

VL - 137

SP - 950e-953e

JO - Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

JF - Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

SN - 0032-1052

IS - 6

ER -