Scalpel Versus Electrocautery for Upper Lateral Cartilage Contouring in Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Comparative Study.

IF 3 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Serhat Şibar, Ayhan Işık Erdal, Mustafa Talha Okutan
{"title":"Scalpel Versus Electrocautery for Upper Lateral Cartilage Contouring in Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Comparative Study.","authors":"Serhat Şibar, Ayhan Işık Erdal, Mustafa Talha Okutan","doi":"10.1093/asj/sjaf180","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dorsal preservation rhinoplasty maintains dorsum integrity while refining nasal aesthetics, but dorsal hump recurrence is a common limitation, especially after extensive reshaping. Electrocautery offers precise cartilage contouring, yet its role in dorsal preservation rhinoplasty is under-investigated.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the outcomes of scalpel-based mechanical reshaping versus electrocautery-assisted thermal reshaping of the upper lateral cartilage shoulders in low septal strip dorsal preservation rhinoplasty.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 205 patients who underwent low septal strip dorsal preservation rhinoplasty via open approach between February 2021 and May 2023. Patients were grouped according to the method used for reshaping the upper lateral cartilage: Group I underwent mechanical reshaping with a scalpel (mechanical/scalpel group), and Group II underwent thermal reshaping using monopolar electrocautery (thermal/electrocautery group). Dorsal hump recurrence and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated using standardized 12-month postoperative photographs and the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) questionnaire, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 88 patients were included in the scalpel group and 117 in the electrocautery group. Demographic data, hump morphology, and amount of hump reduction were similar between groups. However, the recurrence rate of the dorsal hump was significantly lower in the electrocautery group (2.5%) compared to the scalpel group (13.6%). ROE scores were high in both groups (84.4 vs. 85.0, p>0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Electrocautery-assisted upper lateral cartilage reshaping in dorsal preservation rhinoplasty offers more consistent contouring and reduced recurrence rates compared to scalpel-based technique. It represents a valuable technical adjunct, especially in cases with challenging dorsal anatomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":7728,"journal":{"name":"Aesthetic Surgery Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aesthetic Surgery Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjaf180","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Dorsal preservation rhinoplasty maintains dorsum integrity while refining nasal aesthetics, but dorsal hump recurrence is a common limitation, especially after extensive reshaping. Electrocautery offers precise cartilage contouring, yet its role in dorsal preservation rhinoplasty is under-investigated.

Objectives: To compare the outcomes of scalpel-based mechanical reshaping versus electrocautery-assisted thermal reshaping of the upper lateral cartilage shoulders in low septal strip dorsal preservation rhinoplasty.

Methods: This retrospective study included 205 patients who underwent low septal strip dorsal preservation rhinoplasty via open approach between February 2021 and May 2023. Patients were grouped according to the method used for reshaping the upper lateral cartilage: Group I underwent mechanical reshaping with a scalpel (mechanical/scalpel group), and Group II underwent thermal reshaping using monopolar electrocautery (thermal/electrocautery group). Dorsal hump recurrence and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated using standardized 12-month postoperative photographs and the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) questionnaire, respectively.

Results: A total of 88 patients were included in the scalpel group and 117 in the electrocautery group. Demographic data, hump morphology, and amount of hump reduction were similar between groups. However, the recurrence rate of the dorsal hump was significantly lower in the electrocautery group (2.5%) compared to the scalpel group (13.6%). ROE scores were high in both groups (84.4 vs. 85.0, p>0.05).

Conclusions: Electrocautery-assisted upper lateral cartilage reshaping in dorsal preservation rhinoplasty offers more consistent contouring and reduced recurrence rates compared to scalpel-based technique. It represents a valuable technical adjunct, especially in cases with challenging dorsal anatomy.

背部保存鼻成形术中手术刀与电灼对上外侧软骨轮廓的回顾性比较研究。
背景:背部保留鼻整形术在改善鼻美学的同时保持了背部的完整性,但背部驼峰复发是常见的限制,特别是在广泛重塑后。电灼提供精确的软骨轮廓,但其在背部保存鼻整形术中的作用尚不清楚。目的:比较下鼻中隔条状背侧保留鼻成形术中基于刀的机械整形与电灼辅助的上外侧软骨肩部热整形的效果。方法:本回顾性研究纳入了205例于2021年2月至2023年5月间通过开放入路行低间隔条状背侧保留鼻成形术的患者。根据上外侧软骨的整形方法进行分组:ⅰ组采用手术刀机械整形(机械/手术刀组),ⅱ组采用单极电灼热整形(热/电灼组)。背驼峰复发和患者报告的结果分别使用标准化的12个月术后照片和鼻整形结果评估(ROE)问卷进行评估。结果:手术刀组88例,电灼组117例。人口学数据、驼峰形态和驼峰减少量在两组之间相似。然而,背部驼峰的复发率电灼组(2.5%)明显低于手术刀组(13.6%)。两组ROE评分均较高(84.4比85.0,p < 0.05)。结论:与基于手术刀的技术相比,电灼辅助上外侧软骨重塑术在背部保存鼻成形术中提供了更一致的轮廓和更低的复发率。它代表了一个有价值的技术辅助,特别是在具有挑战性的背解剖情况下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
20.70%
发文量
309
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Aesthetic Surgery Journal is a peer-reviewed international journal focusing on scientific developments and clinical techniques in aesthetic surgery. The official publication of The Aesthetic Society, ASJ is also the official English-language journal of many major international societies of plastic, aesthetic and reconstructive surgery representing South America, Central America, Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. It is also the official journal of the British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons, the Canadian Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery and The Rhinoplasty Society.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信