Evaluation of Nasal Tip Support in Septorhinoplasty

Erol O., Buyuklu F., Koycu A., Bas C., Erbek S. S.

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, vol.43, no.4, pp.1021-1027, 2019 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 43 Issue: 4
  • Publication Date: 2019
  • Doi Number: 10.1007/s00266-019-01352-2
  • Journal Name: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus
  • Page Numbers: pp.1021-1027
  • Keywords: Nasal tip, Newton meter, Rhinoplasty, Tip support, Tip surgery
  • Istanbul Gelisim University Affiliated: No


Background: A good understanding of nasal tip support mechanisms is essential for achieving successful and functional rhinoplasty results. The loss of nasal tip support resulting from different maneuvers adopted during rhinoplasty and how this loss is affected by reconstructive applications should be known. This study evaluated and compared changes in nasal tip support perioperatively after different techniques were used during septorhinoplasty. Methods: Patients who underwent primary open rhinoplasty between January 2018 and March 2018 in a tertiary medical center were included in this prospective blind case series. Nasal tip resistance measurements were taken after perioperative maneuvers by creating enough force to achieve 1 mm, 2 mm and 3 mm of displacement at the tip region. Measurements were obtained during six different stages using a Newton meter: preoperatively, after caudal septal resection, after skin flap elevation, after the columellar strut or tongue-in-groove procedure, after tip suturing and postoperatively. Our hypothesis was that during septorhinoplasty, each maneuver used changes the tip support intraoperatively. The predictor variables were the different rhinoplasty techniques used. The outcome variable was nasal tip resistance to compression intraoperatively and immediate postoperatively. Appropriate statistics were computed, and a p < 0.05 value was considered significant. Results: Ten of the 15 patients were female, and 5 were male. The patient age ranged from 19 to 40 (mean 24.8 ± 4.9). The tongue-in-groove technique was applied in 5 of the patients, while columellar strut grafting was performed in 10. The application of columellar strut grafting did not create a significant increase in nasal tip support (p > 0.05). An increase in nasal tip support was observed at each stage (85%, 53%, 35%) after application of the tongue-in-groove technique (p < 0.05). Conclusions: A novel and reproducible technique for digitally evaluating manual force is presented for determining changes in nasal tip support with different maneuvers applied in living patients undergoing rhinoplasty. No significant difference was noted between the preoperative and postoperative measurements for columellar strut grafting. The tongue-in-groove technique is an important maneuver that has a significant effect on nasal tip support. According to our data, the interdomal and intercrural ligaments, the medial crus–septum connections and the connections between alar cartilage and overlying skin and muscle tissue are important structures for tip support. Level of Evidence IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.