EVALUATION OF RESULTS OF CLOSED RHINOPLASTY USING AURICULAR CARTILAGE AND SYNTHETIC MATERIALS

Kim Trong Le1, , Van Doi Pham2, Ngoc Quang Minh Mai2, Ngoc Thanh Do3, Quang Tri Le4
1 School of Medicine and Pharmacy, University of Danang
2 Nguyen Tat Thanh University
3 Military Hospital 7A
4 Military Hospital 175

Main Article Content

Abstract

 Background: Closed rhinoplasty is a technically challenging procedure due to the limited access to underlying anatomical structures, requiring substantial surgical experience. However, it offers the advantages of minimal external scarring and a significantly shorter recovery time compared to open rhinoplasty. Objectives: To evaluate the outcomes and complications of closed rhinoplasty using auricular cartilage and synthetic materials. Materials and methods: A case series of 44 patients who underwent closed rhinoplasty with septal extension grafts made of polycaprolactone and auricular cartilage at 7A Military Hospital between April 2024 and February 2025 was analyzed. Results: The majority of patients were female, with a mean age of 22 ± 4.5 years. The mean operative time was 130 ± 25 minutes; 78% were primary surgeries and 22% were revision procedures. Postoperatively, patients demonstrated significant improvement in nasal anthropometric parameters. Mild incision erythema occurred in 11% of cases, and 11% reported temporary nasal obstruction that was completely resolved within two weeks. No cases of infection, implant extrusion, nasal deviation, necrosis, or columellar retraction were observed. All patients achieved good wound healing; 13.6% had faint scars on the nasal vestibular mucosa, and no visible columellar scars were detected. Patient satisfaction was high, with 84% reporting being very satisfied, 16% satisfied, and none dissatisfied with the surgical outcomes. Conclusion: Closed rhinoplasty using auricular cartilage and synthetic materials can be effectively applied in both primary and revision procedures. The postoperative course is smooth with minimal complications, and the technique provides excellent aesthetic results without columellar scarring, achieving high patient satisfaction. 

Article Details

References

1. Gupta R, John J, Ranganathan N, et al. Outcomes of Closed versus Open Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review. Arch Plast Surg. 2022. 49(5):569-579. doi:10.1055/s-0042-1756315.
2. Azzawi S, Kidd T, Shoaib T. Closed Rhinoplasty. A Single Surgeon Experience of 238 Cases over 2 Years. Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery. 2020. 74(3):255259. doi: 10.1007/s12070-020-01990-y.
3. Hosseini S, Sadeghi M, Saedi B, et al. Aesthetic and Functional Outcomes of Open versus Closed Septorhinoplasty in Deviated Nose Deformity. International Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery. 2012. 1(2):7-13. doi: 10.4236/ijohns.2012.12002.
4. Howldar S, Fida A, Allinjawi O, et al. Long-term cosmetic and functional outcomes of rhinoplasty: A cross sectional study of patients’ satisfaction. Saudi J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg.2018. (20):1-12. Doi: 10.4103/1319-8491.273913.
5. Jang D, Yu L, Wang Y, et al. Nasal measurements in Asians and high-density porous polyethylene implants in rhinoplasty. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2012.14 (3), 181-7. doi: 10.1001/archfacial.2011.1580.
6. Kim, Ho & Jang, Yong Ju. Columellar Incision Scars in Asian Patients Undergoing Open Rhinoplasty. JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery. 2016.18. doi: 10.1001/jamafacial.2015.2178.
7. Foda H. M. T. External Rhinoplasty for the Arabian Nose: A Columellar Scar Analysis. Aesth. Plast. Surg. 2004. 28, 312-316. doi: 10.1007/s00266-003-3126-7
8. Baz, A., Sidhom, S, Amr, W, Abdelaziz, A, Anany, A. Outcomes of open versus closed rhinoplasty: A Prospective Comparative Clinical Study. Zagazig University Medical Journal. 2024. 30(4), 1163-1172. doi: 10.21608/zumj.2023.195216.2752.
9. Gökçe Kütük S, Arıkan. Evaluation of the effects of open and closed rhinoplasty on the psychosocial stress level and quality of life of rhinoplasty patients. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2019. 72(8), 1347-1354. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2019.03.020.
10. Ngô Văn Công, Lê Huy Hoàng. Đánh giá kết quả phẫu thuật của phương pháp tạo hình mũi kết hợp tạo hình đầu mũi bằng vật liệu polycaprolactone (PCL) và sụn vành tai. Tạp chí y khoa Việt Nam. N1B/4/2024. doi: https://doi.org/10.51298/vmj.v537i1B.9087.
11. Tariq Zahid Khan, Sana Mehfooz, Tehmina Junaid, Rajesh Kumar Vasandani, Zeba Ahmed, Zehra Aqeel Nizami Department of ENT and Head Neck Surgery, Civil Hospital, DUHS, Karachi, Pakistan. Evaluation of postoperative morbidity in open versus closed septorhinoplasty. Rawal Medical Journal. 2019. 47 (3), 627-630.