OUTCOMES OF AESTHETIC AUGMENTATION RHINOPLASTY USING CARTILAGE AT MILITARY HOSPITAL 175

Tấn Hùng Lê 1, , Minh Phong Lê 2
1 Trường Y Dược – Đại học Trà Vinh
2 Bệnh viện Quân y 175

Main Article Content

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate aesthetic outcomes, patient satisfaction, and complications after augmentation rhinoplasty using cartilage.


Subjects and methods: A descriptive case-series study combining retrospective and prospective data was conducted in 52 patients who underwent surgery at the International Department, Military Hospital 175, from January 2024 to October 2025. Outcomes were assessed using the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE), satisfaction measures, aesthetic grading, and complications up to 6 months.


Results: The mean age was 28.3 ± 6.5 years, and 90.4% were women. An open approach was used in 84.6%, while an alloplastic implant combined with autologous cartilage was used in 67.3%. The ROE score increased from 33.8 ± 10.7 before surgery to 78.4 ± 11.6 at 6 months (p < 0.001). At 6 months, 86.5% achieved a good result and 96.2% achieved a good or fair result; 5.8% had a residual complication or sequela, and 3.8% required revision intervention.


Conclusion: Cartilage-assisted augmentation rhinoplasty markedly improved patient-reported outcomes and achieved high satisfaction. Most early complications decreased over time; persistent contour abnormalities and implant-related complications require continued follow-up.

Article Details

References

1. Li D, An Y, Yang X. (2016). An overview of Asian rhinoplasty. Ann Plast Surg, 77(Suppl 1):S22-S24.
2. Jang YJ, Yu MS. (2010). Rhinoplasty for the Asian nose. Facial Plast Surg, 26(2):93-101.
3. Alsarraf R. (2000). Outcomes research in facial plastic surgery: a review and new directions. Aesthetic Plast Surg, 24(3):192-197.
4. Rot P, Krzywdzińska S, Grab P, et al. (2024). The Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) questionnaire in rhinoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Med, 13(16):4642.
5. Wu C, Yang S, Zheng G, et al. (2022). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and complication rates of augmentation rhinoplasty with autologous cartilage and silicone prosthesis. Ann Palliat Med, 11(3):993-1000.
6. Layliev J, Gupta V, Kaoutzanis C, et al. (2017). Incidence and preoperative risk factors for major complications in aesthetic rhinoplasty: analysis of 4978 patients. Aesthet Surg J, 37(7):757-767.
7. Chuangsuwanich A, Lohsiriwat V. (2013). Augmentation rhinoplasty with custom-made S-shape silicone implant in Asians: a 15-year experience. Indian J Plast Surg, 46(3):533-537.
8. Wang H, Fan F, You J, Wang S. (2013). Combined silicone implant and cartilage grafts for augmentation rhinoplasty. J Craniofac Surg, 24(2):494-496.
9. Esteves SS, Ferreira MG, Almeida JC, et al. (2017). Evaluation of aesthetic and functional outcomes in rhinoplasty surgery: a prospective study. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol, 83(5):552-557.
10. Varadharajan K, Sethukumar P, Anwar M, Patel K. (2015). Complications associated with the use of autologous costal cartilage in rhinoplasty: a systematic review. Aesthet Surg J, 35(6):644-652.