Abi Zeid Daou Christophe, Jalkh Rita Maria, Semaan Zeina Maria, Daou Anne Marie
From the Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon.
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2025 Aug 6;13(8):e7047. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000007047. eCollection 2025 Aug.
Despite advancements in techniques, the choice between open and closed rhinoplasty remains contentious. This decision is influenced by patient-specific factors, deformity complexity, and surgeon expertise, with outcomes often tied to functional and aesthetic results.
A systematic literature search was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Databases searched included Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane. Abstracts and full-text articles were screened, and reference lists from relevant articles were reviewed to identify additional studies. Two investigators independently performed the review. Studies comparing open and closed rhinoplasty techniques, encompassing randomized controlled trials, prospective studies, and retrospective studies, were included. The target population comprised adults (≥18 y) undergoing rhinoplasty. Key parameters analyzed were changes in Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) score, Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) score, edema, ecchymosis, complications, and operative time.
Twenty studies were included, with 12 providing data for meta-analysis (1067 patients: 539 open rhinoplasty and 528 closed rhinoplasty). Study quality was moderate, with limitations such as the absence of sample size calculations and biased endpoint assessments. No significant differences were identified between the approaches in ROE scores (standardized mean difference = -0.16), NOSE scores (standardized mean difference = 0.21), edema, ecchymosis, operative time, satisfaction, or complication rates. Heterogeneity was observed in the ROE (² = 99%) and NOSE (² = 86%) analyses, reflecting technique and patient variability.
Open and closed rhinoplasty techniques show similar efficacy. The choice should be tailored to patient needs and surgeon expertise. Continued innovation and standardized research are essential to optimize outcomes.
尽管技术有所进步,但开放式和封闭式鼻整形术之间的选择仍存在争议。这一决定受患者特定因素、畸形复杂性和外科医生专业知识的影响,其结果通常与功能和美学效果相关。
按照系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目指南进行系统文献检索。检索的数据库包括Medline、PubMed、Embase和Cochrane。对摘要和全文文章进行筛选,并查阅相关文章的参考文献列表以识别其他研究。两名研究者独立进行综述。纳入比较开放式和封闭式鼻整形术技术的研究,包括随机对照试验、前瞻性研究和回顾性研究。目标人群为接受鼻整形术的成年人(≥18岁)。分析的关键参数包括鼻整形术结果评估(ROE)评分、鼻塞症状评估(NOSE)评分、水肿、瘀斑、并发症和手术时间的变化。
纳入20项研究,其中12项提供了Meta分析数据(1067例患者:539例行开放式鼻整形术,528例行封闭式鼻整形术)。研究质量中等,存在样本量计算缺失和终点评估有偏倚等局限性。两种方法在ROE评分(标准化均差=-0.16)、NOSE评分(标准化均差=0.21)、水肿、瘀斑、手术时间、满意度或并发症发生率方面未发现显著差异。在ROE(I²=99%)和NOSE(I²=86%)分析中观察到异质性,反映了技术和患者的变异性。
开放式和封闭式鼻整形术技术显示出相似的疗效。选择应根据患者需求和外科医生专业知识进行调整。持续创新和标准化研究对于优化结果至关重要。