Division of Facial Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.
Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri.
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020 Apr 1;146(4):347-354. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2019.4787.
Augmentation rhinoplasty requires adding cartilage to provide enhanced support to the structure of the nose. Autologous costal cartilage and irradiated homologous costal cartilage (IHCC) are well-accepted rhinoplasty options. Tutoplast is another alternative cartilage source. No studies, to our knowledge, have definitively demonstrated a higher rate of complications with IHCC grafts compared with autologous costal cartilage grafts.
To compare rates of outcomes in the published literature for patients undergoing septorhinoplasty with autologous costal cartilage vs IHCC grafts vs Tutoplast grafts.
For this systematic review and meta-analysis, the MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for articles published from database inception to February 2019 using the following keywords: septorhinoplasty, rhinoplasty, autologous costal cartilage graft, cadaveric cartilage graft, and rib graft.
Abstracts and full texts were reviewed in duplicate, and disagreements were resolved by consensus. Only patients who underwent an en bloc dorsal onlay graft were included for comparison to ensure a homogenous study sample. A total of 1308 results were found. After duplicate records were removed, 576 unique citations remained. Studies were published worldwide between January 1, 1990, and December 31, 2017.
Independent extraction by 2 authors was performed. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.
All reported outcomes after septorhinoplasty and rates of graft warping, resorption, infection, contour irregularity, and revision surgery among patients receiving autologous grafts vs IHCC vs Tutoplast cartilage grafts.
Of 576 unique citations, 54 studies were included in our systematic review; 28 studies were included after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria. Our search captured 1041 patients of whom 741 received autologous grafts and 293 received IHCC grafts (regardless of type). When autologous cartilage (n = 748) vs IHCC (n = 153) vs Tutoplast cartilage (n = 140) grafts were compared, no difference in warping (5%; 95% CI, 3%-9%), resorption (2%; 95% CI, 0%-2%), contour irregularity (1%; 95% CI, 0%-3%), infection (2%; 95% CI, 0%-4%), or revision surgery (5%; 95% CI, 2%-9%) was found.
No difference was found in outcomes between autologous and homologous costal cartilage grafts, including rates of warping, resorption, infection, contour irregularity, or revisions, in patients undergoing dorsal augmentation rhinoplasty. En bloc dorsal onlay grafts are commonly used in augmentation rhinoplasty to provide contour and structure to the nasal dorsum.
隆鼻术需要添加软骨来增强鼻子结构的支撑力。自体肋软骨和辐照同种异体肋软骨(IHCC)是公认的隆鼻选择。Tutoplast 是另一种替代软骨来源。据我们所知,尚无研究明确证明 IHCC 移植物的并发症发生率高于自体肋软骨移植物。
比较发表文献中接受鼻中隔成形术的患者中,自体肋软骨与 IHCC 移植物与 Tutoplast 移植物的结果发生率。
本系统评价和荟萃分析中,使用以下关键字在 MEDLINE、Embase、Scopus、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库和 ClinicalTrials.gov 数据库中搜索了从数据库成立到 2019 年 2 月发表的文章:鼻中隔成形术、隆鼻术、自体肋软骨移植物、尸体软骨移植物和肋骨移植物。
通过双人独立进行摘要和全文的回顾,通过共识解决分歧。仅纳入整块背侧覆盖移植物的患者进行比较,以确保研究样本同质。共发现 1308 个结果。在去除重复记录后,仍有 576 个唯一引用。研究在 1990 年 1 月 1 日至 2017 年 12 月 31 日期间在全球范围内发表。
由 2 名作者独立进行提取。使用随机效应模型对数据进行汇总。
鼻中隔成形术后所有报告的结果,以及接受自体移植物与 IHCC 与 Tutoplast 软骨移植物的患者中移植物扭曲、吸收、感染、轮廓不规则和再次手术的发生率。
在 576 个唯一引用中,有 54 项研究被纳入我们的系统综述;在应用纳入和排除标准后,有 28 项研究被纳入。我们的搜索共捕获了 1041 名患者,其中 741 名接受了自体移植物,293 名接受了 IHCC 移植物(无论类型如何)。当自体软骨(n=748)与 IHCC(n=153)与 Tutoplast 软骨(n=140)移植物进行比较时,未发现扭曲(5%;95%CI,3%-9%)、吸收(2%;95%CI,0%-2%)、轮廓不规则(1%;95%CI,0%-3%)、感染(2%;95%CI,0%-4%)或再次手术(5%;95%CI,2%-9%)的差异。
在接受背侧增强隆鼻术的患者中,自体和同种异体肋软骨移植物之间在结果方面没有差异,包括扭曲、吸收、感染、轮廓不规则或修复的发生率。整块背侧覆盖移植物常用于隆鼻术,以提供鼻背的轮廓和结构。