Mariline Santos, Sam P Most, Ivan Wayne, Sureyya Seneldir, Miguel Gonçalves Ferreira
{"title":"鼻背保留整形术--\"保留者 \"与 \"结构 \"外科医生的观点。","authors":"Mariline Santos, Sam P Most, Ivan Wayne, Sureyya Seneldir, Miguel Gonçalves Ferreira","doi":"10.1089/fpsam.2024.0141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The objective of this study was to describe the surgeons who have incorporated dorsal preservation (DP) into their practice and their techniques. An anonymous form reviewed by the Evidence-Based Rhinoplasty Research Group board was shared on its Telegram group. The study population was divided into three groups based on their answers: \"Preservers,\" \"Mainly Structural,\" and \"Structural exclusively.\" This study included the answers of 145 worldwide surgeons. DP was more common among plastic surgeons than otolaryngologists/facial plastic surgeons; DP techniques were mostly preferred by surgeons with 10-20 years of experience, while structural techniques were mostly preferred by surgeons with > 20 years of experience; 50.8% of the surgeons who prefer DP techniques use it in more than 90% of primaries; surface techniques (ST) have been more used, mainly by surgeons who prefer structural techniques (p < 0.001). ST were considered more stable (p < 0.001), more predictable (p < 0.001), and shorter learning curve (p < 0.001). Many surgeons using DP still perform structural rhinoplasty. The most cited concern was hump persistence/recurrence. DP rhinoplasty is gaining acceptance, and ST are favored for their perceived short learning curve, stability, and predictability. However, concerns about hump recurrence cause some to continue using structural methods alongside DP.</p>","PeriodicalId":48487,"journal":{"name":"Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty-the Perspective of \\\"Preservers\\\" Versus \\\"Structural\\\" Surgeons.\",\"authors\":\"Mariline Santos, Sam P Most, Ivan Wayne, Sureyya Seneldir, Miguel Gonçalves Ferreira\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/fpsam.2024.0141\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The objective of this study was to describe the surgeons who have incorporated dorsal preservation (DP) into their practice and their techniques. An anonymous form reviewed by the Evidence-Based Rhinoplasty Research Group board was shared on its Telegram group. The study population was divided into three groups based on their answers: \\\"Preservers,\\\" \\\"Mainly Structural,\\\" and \\\"Structural exclusively.\\\" This study included the answers of 145 worldwide surgeons. DP was more common among plastic surgeons than otolaryngologists/facial plastic surgeons; DP techniques were mostly preferred by surgeons with 10-20 years of experience, while structural techniques were mostly preferred by surgeons with > 20 years of experience; 50.8% of the surgeons who prefer DP techniques use it in more than 90% of primaries; surface techniques (ST) have been more used, mainly by surgeons who prefer structural techniques (p < 0.001). ST were considered more stable (p < 0.001), more predictable (p < 0.001), and shorter learning curve (p < 0.001). Many surgeons using DP still perform structural rhinoplasty. The most cited concern was hump persistence/recurrence. DP rhinoplasty is gaining acceptance, and ST are favored for their perceived short learning curve, stability, and predictability. However, concerns about hump recurrence cause some to continue using structural methods alongside DP.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48487,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/fpsam.2024.0141\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/fpsam.2024.0141","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty-the Perspective of "Preservers" Versus "Structural" Surgeons.
The objective of this study was to describe the surgeons who have incorporated dorsal preservation (DP) into their practice and their techniques. An anonymous form reviewed by the Evidence-Based Rhinoplasty Research Group board was shared on its Telegram group. The study population was divided into three groups based on their answers: "Preservers," "Mainly Structural," and "Structural exclusively." This study included the answers of 145 worldwide surgeons. DP was more common among plastic surgeons than otolaryngologists/facial plastic surgeons; DP techniques were mostly preferred by surgeons with 10-20 years of experience, while structural techniques were mostly preferred by surgeons with > 20 years of experience; 50.8% of the surgeons who prefer DP techniques use it in more than 90% of primaries; surface techniques (ST) have been more used, mainly by surgeons who prefer structural techniques (p < 0.001). ST were considered more stable (p < 0.001), more predictable (p < 0.001), and shorter learning curve (p < 0.001). Many surgeons using DP still perform structural rhinoplasty. The most cited concern was hump persistence/recurrence. DP rhinoplasty is gaining acceptance, and ST are favored for their perceived short learning curve, stability, and predictability. However, concerns about hump recurrence cause some to continue using structural methods alongside DP.