Nasal Grafts and Implants in Revision Rhinoplasty

  • Thomas Romo III
    Corresponding author. 135 East 74th Street, New York, NY 10021.
    Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, NY 10021, USA

    Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The New York Eye and Ear Infirmary, New York, NY 10003, USA
    Search for articles by this author
  • Edward S. Kwak
    Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The New York Eye and Ear Infirmary, New York, NY 10003, USA
    Search for articles by this author
      Revision rhinoplasty presents numerous challenges to the facial plastic surgeon. From the initial preoperative evaluation, the surgeon has the difficult task of recognizing and addressing complex psychologic issues. During this evaluation, the surgeon must clearly communicate to the patient potential limitations inherent in revision surgery; patient expectations should parallel realistic outcomes. In addition, the surgeon must accurately diagnose problematic nasal structure and function often distorted from the previous surgery. Technically, revision rhinoplasty can be extremely challenging. Scar tissue, distorted nasal anatomy, and weakened nasal architecture, if not recognized by the surgeon, can result in worse outcomes. To address these challenges, the successful surgeon incorporates a multifaceted strategy in revision rhinoplasty, which ultimately results in a satisfied patient, restoration of nasal function, and the creation of an esthetically appealing form.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      PDF Download and 24 Hours Online Access
      Subscribers receive full online access to your subscription and archive of back issues up to and including 2002.
      Content published before 2002 is available via pay-per-view purchase only.


      Subscribe to Facial Plastic Surgery Clinics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Quatela V.C.
        • Wayne I.
        Challenges of secondary rhinoplasty.
        Facial Plast Surg Clin N Am. 2000; 8: 515-537
        • Sclafani A.P.
        • Romo T.
        Biology and chemistry of facial implants.
        Facial Plast Surg. 2000; 16: 3-6
        • Cardenas-Camarena L.
        • Guerrero M.T.
        Use of cartilaginous autografts in surgery: 8 years of experience.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1999; 103: 1003-1014
        • Ortiz-Monasterio F.
        • Olmedo A.
        • Oscoy L.O.
        The use of cartilage grafts in primary aesthetic rhinoplasty.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1981; 67: 597-605
        • Breadon G.E.
        • Kern E.B.
        • Neel III, H.B.
        Autografts of crushed and uncrushed bone and cartilage.
        Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1979; 105: 75-80
        • Cakmak O.
        • Bircan S.
        • Buyuklu F.
        • et al.
        Viability of crushed and diced cartilage grafts: a study in rabbits.
        Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2005; 7: 21-26
        • Tardy M.E.
        • Denneny J.
        • Fritsch M.H.
        The versatile cartilage autograft in reconstruction of the nose and face.
        Laryngoscope. 1985; 95: 523-533
        • Gunter J.P.
        • Rohrich R.
        Augmentation rhinoplasty: dorsal onlay grafting using shaped autogenous septal cartilage.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1990; 86: 39-45
        • Adamson P.A.
        Grafts in rhinoplasty: autogenous grafts are superior to alloplastic.
        Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2000; 126: 561-562
        • Harris S.
        Cartilage warping: an experimental model.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1993; 92: 912-915
        • Toriumi D.M.
        Autogenous grafts are worth the extra time.
        Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2000; 126: 562-564
        • Gunter J.P.
        • Clark C.P.
        • Friedman R.M.
        Internal stabilization of autogenous rib cartilage grafts in rhinoplasty: a barrier to cartilage warping.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1997; 100: 161-169
        • Daniel R.K.
        Rhinoplasty and rib grafts: evolving a flexible operating technique.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1994; 94: 597-609
        • Smith J.D.
        • Abramson M.
        Membranous vs. endochondral bone autografts.
        Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1974; 99: 203-205
        • Jackson I.T.
        • Smith J.
        • Mixter R.C.
        Nasal bone grafting using split skull grafts.
        Ann Plast Surg. 1983; 11: 533-540
        • Frodel J.L.
        • Marentette L.J.
        • Quatela V.C.
        • et al.
        Calvarial bone graft harvest.
        Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1993; 119: 17-23
        • Romo T.
        • Jablonski R.D.
        Nasal reconstruction using split calvarial grafts.
        Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1992; 107: 622-629
        • Kridel R.W.H.
        • Krause W.M.
        Grafts and implants in revision rhinoplasty.
        Facial Plast Surg Clin N Am. 1995; 3: 473-486
        • Guerrerosantos J.
        Nose and paranasal augmentation: autogenous, fascia, and cartilage.
        Clin Plast Surg. 1991; 18: 65-86
        • Kridel R.W.H.
        • Konior R.J.
        Irradiated cartilage grafts in the nose: a preliminary report.
        Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1993; 119: 24-30
        • Dingman R.O.
        • Grabb W.C.
        Costal cartilage homografts preserved by irradiation.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1972; 50: 516-517
        • Murakami C.S.
        • Cook T.A.
        • Guida R.A.
        Nasal reconstruction with articulated irradiated rib cartilage.
        Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1991; 117: 327-330
        • Sclafani A.P.
        • Romo T.
        • Jacono A.A.
        • et al.
        Evaluation of acellular dermal graft (Alloderm) sheet for soft tissue augmentation: a 1-year follow-up of clinical observations and histological findings.
        Facial Plast Surg. 2001; 3: 101-103
        • Gryskiewicz J.M.
        • Rohrich R.J.
        • Reagan B.J.
        The use of alloderm for the correction of nasal contour deformities.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001; 107: 561-570
        • Sclafani A.P.
        • Romo T.
        Alloplasts for nasal augmentation: clinical experience and scientific rationale.
        Facial Plast Surg Clin N Am. 1999; 7: 43-54
        • Neel H.B.
        Implants of Gore-Tex: comparisons with Teflon coated polytetrafluorethylene carbon and porous polyethylene implants.
        Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1983; 109: 427-433
        • Maas C.S.
        • Gnepp D.R.
        • Bumpous J.
        Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (Gore-Tex soft-tissue patch) in facial augmentation.
        Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1993; 119: 1008-1014
        • Conrad K.
        • Gillman G.
        A 6-year experience with the use of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene in rhinoplasty.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998; 101: 1675-1683
        • Mass C.S.
        • Monhian N.
        • Shah S.B.
        Implants in rhinoplasty.
        Facial Plast Surg. 1998; 13: 279-290
        • Godin M.S.
        • Waldman S.R.
        • Johnson C.M.
        Nasal augmentation using Gore-Tex: a 10-year experience.
        Arch Facial Plast Surg. 1999; 1: 118-121
        • Schoenrock L.D.
        • Repucci A.D.
        Correction of subcutaneous facial defects using Gore-Tex.
        Facial Plast Surg Clin N Am. 1994; 2: 373-387
        • Batniji R.K.
        • Hutchison J.L.
        • Dahiya R.
        • et al.
        Tissue response to expanded polyfluoroethylene and silicone implants in a rabbit model.
        Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2002; 4: 111-113
        • Spector M.
        • Harmon S.L.
        • Kreutner A.
        Characteristics of tissue growth into Proplast and porous polyethylene implants in bone.
        J Biomed Mater Res. 1979; 13: 677-692
        • Berghaus A.
        • Mulch G.
        • Handrock M.
        Porous polyethylene and Proplast: their behavior in a bony implant bed.
        Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1984; 240: 115-119
        • Sclafani A.P.
        • Romo T.
        • Silver L.
        Clinical and histologic behavior of exposed porous high density polyethylene implants.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1997; 99: 41-50
        • Sclafani A.P.
        • Thomas J.R.
        • Cox A.J.
        • et al.
        Clinical and histologic response of subcutaneous expanded polytetrafluorethylene (Gore-Tex) and porous high density polyethylene (Medpor) implants to acute and early infection.
        Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997; 123: 328-336
        • Constantino P.D.
        • Friedman C.D.
        • Lane A.
        Synthetic biomaterials in facial plastic and reconstructive surgery.
        Facial Plast Surg. 1993; 9: 1-15
        • Wellisz T.
        Clinical experience with the Medpor porous polyethylene implant.
        Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1993; 17: 339-344
        • Romo T.
        • Sclafani A.P.
        • Sabini P.
        Use of porous high-density polyethylene in revision rhinoplasty and in the platyrrhine nose.
        Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1998; 22: 211-221
      1. Romo T, Sonne J, Choe KS, et al. Revision rhinoplasty. Facial Plast Surg 19(4):299–307.

        • Romo T.
        • McLaughlin L.
        • Levine J.M.
        • et al.
        Nasal implants: autogenous, semisynthetic, and synthetic.
        Facial Plast Surg Clin N Am. 2002; 10: 155-166
        • Lam S.M.
        • Kim Y.K.
        Augmentation rhinoplasty of the Asian nose with the “bird” silicone implant.
        Ann Plast Surg. 2003; 51: 249-256
        • Deva A.K.
        • Merten S.
        • Chang L.
        Silicone in nasal augmentation rhinoplasty: a decade of clinical experience.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998; 102: 1230-1237
        • Davis P.K.
        • Jones S.M.
        The complications of Silastic implants.
        Br J Plast Surg. 1971; 24: 405-411
        • Webster R.C.
        • Gaunt J.M.
        • Hamdan U.S.
        • et al.
        Injectable silicone for facial soft-tissue augmentation.
        Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1986; 112: 290-296
        • Achauer B.M.
        A serious complication following medical-grade silicone injection of the face.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1983; 71: 251-254
        • Colton J.J.
        • Beekhuis G.J.
        Use of Mersilene mesh in nasal augmentation.
        Facial Plast Surg. 1992; 8: 149-156
        • Fanous N.
        Mersilene tip implants in rhinoplasty: a review of 98 cases.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1991; 87: 662-671
        • Fanous N.
        • Samaha M.
        • Yoskovitch A.
        Dacron implants in rhinoplasty: a review of 126 cases of tip and dorsum implants.
        Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2002; 4: 149-156
        • Biesman B.
        Soft tissue augmentation using Restylene.
        Facial Plast Surg. 2004; 20: 171-177
        • Lemperle G.
        • Morhenn V.
        • Charrier U.
        Human histology and persistence of various injectable filler substances of soft tissue augmentation.
        Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2003; 27: 354-366
        • Flaharty P.
        Facial Plast Surg. 2004; 20: 165-169