2019
DOI: 10.1007/s00238-019-01518-w
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Literature scans: cartilage grafts in nasal tip rhinoplasty

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Clinical and quality were performed based on the following criteria: Surveys related to the patient's grade of satisfaction (about resulting tip projection, softness, and volume contours, availability to undergo the procedure again, to recommend the treatment to friends, sufficient information about risks and complications [range 1-6: excellent (1); very good (2); good (3); sufficient (4); poor (5); and very poor (6)]) (Appendix A, available as Supplementary Material online, http://links.lww. com/SCS/D139); Clinical evaluation based on physician global assessment score (excellent, good, discreet, enough, poor, and inadequate); Clinical evaluation based on patient global assessment score (excellent, good, discreet, enough, poor, and inadequate); Visual analog scale (range 1-6: excellent [1]; very good [2]; good [3]; sufficient [4]; poor [5]; and very poor [6]); Factors/variables, as asymmetries, deformities, thickness, itching, and pain (presence or absence); Adverse effects signaling (did not occur).…”
Section: Clinical and Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Clinical and quality were performed based on the following criteria: Surveys related to the patient's grade of satisfaction (about resulting tip projection, softness, and volume contours, availability to undergo the procedure again, to recommend the treatment to friends, sufficient information about risks and complications [range 1-6: excellent (1); very good (2); good (3); sufficient (4); poor (5); and very poor (6)]) (Appendix A, available as Supplementary Material online, http://links.lww. com/SCS/D139); Clinical evaluation based on physician global assessment score (excellent, good, discreet, enough, poor, and inadequate); Clinical evaluation based on patient global assessment score (excellent, good, discreet, enough, poor, and inadequate); Visual analog scale (range 1-6: excellent [1]; very good [2]; good [3]; sufficient [4]; poor [5]; and very poor [6]); Factors/variables, as asymmetries, deformities, thickness, itching, and pain (presence or absence); Adverse effects signaling (did not occur).…”
Section: Clinical and Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the last 10 years, surgical procedures in nasal tip remodeling were deeply modified with a gradual shifting from a more invasive procedure using cartilage grafts (CGs), to a more conservative rhinoplasty based exclusively on existent cartilage remodeling by “Lateral Crural Steal” (LCS) and “Tongue in Groove” (TING), techniques 1,2 . In fact, the side effects related to the use of CGs as displacement, resorption, deformities, necrosis 3,4 shifted the attention of several authors to develop new, and noninvasive strategies for remodeling nasal tips. As known, the nasal tip is the anatomic subunit of the nose that plays a pivot role in both cosmetic and functional, being constituted both the cartilaginous support structure and nasal valves 5–8 .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%