Traction suture modification to tongue-in-groove caudal septoplasty

Correcting Caudal Septal Deviation with a Modified Horizontal Mattress Suture

Correction of caudal septal deviation remains surgically challenging, given its imperative function as a nasal tip stabilizer and factor in tip projection, as well as its impact on the nasolabial angle and length of the nose. Although various procedures have been devised to repair the caudal septum using grafting techniques, correction with minimally invasive isolated suture techniques is limited. In this case report, we describe a modified horizontal mattress suture to correct caudal septal deviation in a patient undergoing revision septorhinoplasty. The patient followed up for 2 years after the surgery, and correction of the anterior caudal septum deviation remained intact.

North American survey and systematic review on caudal Septoplasty

Background

Surgical correction of caudal septal deviation is a technically challenging step of functional rhinoplasty. Multiple surgical techniques have been described in the literature but comparing the efficacy of each in relieving obstruction presents a challenge. Outcome measures are necessary to adequately compare techniques. This study aims to describe the current caudal septoplasty techniques of Otolaryngologists and Facial plastic and reconstructive surgeons (FPRS), as well as their use of outcome measures, and to compare these practices with surgical trends described in the literature.

Methods

An online survey was sent to three Otolaryngology and FPRS associations in Canada and the United States. A systematic review was conducted on SCOPUS and PubMed to classify the caudal septoplasty techniques described in the literature and the outcome measurement tools used.

Results

Our survey identified that caudal septoplasty is more commonly performed by surgeons with an FPRS training background. The most common techniques were the swinging door technique (69.5%), extracorporeal septoplasy (46.7%), cartilage scoring (45.3%), and splinting with bone (25.4%). Despite using a vast array of surgical techniques, North American physicians rarely rely on standardized outcome assessment tools. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used almost twice as frequently in the literature as they are by surgeons in their clinical practice.

Conclusion

We recommend that future studies of caudal septoplasty include an assessment of both form and function using a validated PROM such as the Standardized Cosmesis and Health Nasal Outcomes Survey.

Changes in elastic properties of the nasal tip using Columellar strut graft versus tongue-in-groove method over one year after rhinoplasty

INTRODUCTION

In this study, we decided to investigate the changes in elasticity of the nasal tip using Columellar strut graft versus toung in groove method over a year after rhinoplasty.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this before-after randomized clinical trial study, 44 candidates for rhinoplasty were enrolled Columellar strut graft group (n = 22) and toung in groove group (n = 22). Also 22 patients who referred to ENT clinic without any previous rhinoplasty and without any decision for it during the next year, considered as control group. One group underwent columellar strut graft and the other one underwent tongue in groove rhinoplasty and in control group participants received no intervention. Nasolabial angle and elasticity of the nasal tip were recorded and compared before the surgery, immediately after the surgery, 3 months and one year after the surgery.

RESULT

There was no significant difference between the mean elasticity of the nose and the nasolabial angle before the surgery, immediately after the surgery and 3 months after the surgery between the groups. However, there was significant differences in the mean elasticity of the nose and the nasolabial angle between the groups one year after the surgery (P value < 0.05). Pearson correlation coefficient test showed a significant correlation between nasal tip elasticity 3 months and 1 year after rhinoplasty (P = 0.032, r = 0.459) and nasolabial angle 3 months and 1 year after rhinoplasty (P = 0.045, r = 0.431).

CONCLUSION

According to the results, it can be concluded that the both the Columellar strut graft and toung in groove methods improve elastic properties of the nasal tip and nasolabial angle after rhinoplasty compare to the control group.

Different techniques for caudal extension graft placement in rhinoplasty

INTRODUCTION

The caudal extension graft is usually a cartilage graft that overlaps the caudal margin of the nasal septum. A combination of the caudal extension graft and the tongue-in-groove technique is used to stabilize the nasal base, set tip projection, and refine the alar-columellar relationship.

OBJECTIVES

In this study we present some new modifications to the placement of caudal extension grafts in rhinoplasty.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective review of a prospectively collected database of 965 patients who underwent septorhinoplasty from June 2011 to July 2015. Of these, 457 patients required a caudal extension graft and were included in the study. Minimum follow-up was 13.2 months with a mean follow-up time of 17.4 months.

RESULTS

In most cases, comparison of photographs before and after surgery were satisfactory and showed improved contour. Minor deformity was detected in 41 patients and 11 patients needed revision surgery.

CONCLUSION

With these modifications the surgeon can employ the caudal extension graft even in angulated caudal septal deviations. A variety of methods have been proposed for correction of caudal nasal deviation.