Minimally invasive techniques in rhinoplasty

Abstract

Purpose of review To present criteria of minimally invasive surgery, which include minimal and hidden incision lines, reduced injury to tissue and application of endoscopic techniques, when feasible; to analyze techniques in rhinoplasty for their minimally invasive character – in light of recent publications; and to discuss the techniques that best meet the criteria of minimally invasive surgery. Recent findings The nose consists of about 60 percent soft tissue and 40 percent skeletal elements. Surgery causes injury to both tissue types through various mechanisms, including mechanical traction, separation, incision, heat, desiccation, and others. Multiple aspects including extent of approach and degree of tissue undermining determine the minimally invasive character of techniques and maneuvers in rhinoplasty. Summary A single incision endonasal approach, the subperichondrial and subperiosteal septal plane, the supraperichondrial plane over the cartilaginous dorsum, the subperiosteal plane over the bony dorsum, limited dorsal undermining with endoscopic visualization when feasible, conventional straight lateral osteotomy or percutaneous curved lateral osteotomy; percutaneous transverse osteotomy; conventional straight paramedian osteotomy; piezo and drill paramedian ostectomy; dorsal uncapping osteotomy; conventional rasp gross dorsal contouring; piezo or drill fine dorsal contouring; (cartilaginous) middle vault ‘let down’; and minimal access subperiosteal turbinate bone resection were found to best fulfil the criteria of minimally invasive surgery. A classification system for the degree of minimally invasiveness of rhinoplasty techniques is proposed as a basis for discussion.

Is Piezosurgery Associated with Improved Patient Outcomes Compared to Conventional Osteotomy in Rhinoplasty? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of RCTs

“…Traditional rhinoplasty techniques, primarily based on conventional osteotomy, have been the cornerstone in nasal surgeries [4]. These techniques, while effective, are often associated with significant postoperative complications such as edema, ecchymosis, and prolonged pain [5].…”