Tristan Tham; Sabreen Bhuiya; Daniel Zhu; Amanda Wong; Thomas Romo III; Alexandros Georgolios
Manhattan Eye, Ear, and Throat Hospital (MEETH), NY, USA
Background Dorsal preservation rhinoplasty (PR-D) includes a set of techniques that attempt to preserve as much of the native nasal anatomy as possible when performing a hump reduction. The clinical outcomes of contemporary PR-D techniques are unclear. Since many of these contemporary techniques in PR have only been published recently, there is limited data on what the outcomes for PR are, especially with regards to revision surgery and hump recurrence. Additionally, most of the published data consists of cohorts of small numbers of patients. To our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis to synthesize the available literature in PR-D techniques.
Learning Objectives To report clinical outcomes in PR-D
Study Objective To synthesize the literature and report the clinical outcomes of contemporary PR-D techniques in a meta-analysis.
Design Type Meta-analysis
Method This meta-analysis was prospectively registered on the PROSPERO database. The Pubmed, Embase, and Scopus databases were searched. Pooled incidence was calculated in a meta-analysis within a random-effects model. Subgroup analysis was performed by stratifying PR-D type.
Results Twenty-two studies representing a cohort of 5,660 patients were included in this study. Post-operative hump recurrence rates (4.71%, 95% CI: 2.94-6.87%), rates of revision rhinoplasty (3.55%, 95% CI: 1.96-5.56%), rates of post-operative nasal deviation (1.45%, 95% CI 0.56-2.75%), and rates of infection (1.92%, 95% CI: 0.65-3.89%) were all found to be low.
Conclusion Dorsal preservation rhinoplasty is a safe alternative to traditional structure rhinoplasty in treating patients with a dorsal hump.