 |
|
Nasal Augmentation Using Gore-Tex
A 10-Year Experience
Michael S. Godin, MD;
S. Randolph Waldman, MD;
Calvin M. Johnson, Jr, MD
Arch Facial Plast Surg. 1999;1:118-121.
Objective To determine on an ongoing basis the safety and efficacy of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (Gore-Tex soft tissue patch and preformed nasal implants) as an implant in rhinoplasty.
Design A retrospective study of 309 consecutive patients who underwent rhinoplasty, including augmentation with Gore-Tex, during a 10-year period.
Setting Two major academic medical centers and 2 private office surgical centers.
Intervention One hundred sixty-two patients (52%) presented for primary rhinoplasty; the remaining 147 (48%) presented for revision surgery. All received Gore-Tex implants to augment the nasal dorsum and/or base. The grafts ranged from 1 to 10 mm in thickness. Follow-up ranged from 5 months to 10 years, 5 months, with an average of 40.4 months.
Main Outcome Measures Clinically noted complications and patient satisfaction.
Results Ten (3.2%) of 309 grafts became infected and were removed. One graft was removed and 1 graft was modified and replaced postoperatively because of excessive augmentation. Infection requiring removal occurred in 8 patients (5.4%) undergoing revision rhinoplasty and in 2 patients (1.2%) undergoing primary rhinoplasty. Nasal septal perforation was present preoperatively in 3 of the patients who developed infection requiring removal, and we consider it a contraindication for nasal Gore-Tex implantation.
Conclusions Gore-Tex remains an effective implant material for nasal augmentation in rhinoplasty. The complication rate in primary cases is low. The risk of infection necessitating removal rises significantly in revision cases, where its use may still be desirable but must be weighed more carefully.
From the Department of Otolaryngology, Medical College of Virginia Campus, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond (Dr Godin); and the Hedgewood Surgical Center, New Orleans, La (Dr Johnson). Dr Waldman is in private practice in Lexington, Ky.
RELATED ARTICLE
Nasal Augmentation Using Gore-Tex: A 10-Year Experience
Fred J. Stucker
Arch Facial Plast Surg. 1999;1(2):122.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Applications of GORE-TEX Implants in Rhinoplasty Reexamined After 17 Years
Conrad et al.
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2008;10:224-231.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Calcium Hydroxylapatite Gel (Radiesse) Injection for the Correction of Postrhinoplasty Contour Deficiencies and Asymmetries
Stupak et al.
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2007;9:130-136.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
International article review.
Snyder
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2006;8:233-233.
FULL TEXT
Rhinoplasty and the Nasal SMAS Augmentation Graft: Advantages and Indications
Davis and Wayne
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2004;6:124-132.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Gore-Tex Chin Implants: A Review of 324 Cases
Godin et al.
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2003;5:224-227.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Radix Graft in Cosmetic Rhinoplasty
Johnson and Alsarraf
Arch Facial Plast Surg 2001;3:120-121.
FULL TEXT
Grafts in Rhinoplasty: Alloplastic vs Autogenous
Porter
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;126:558-561.
FULL TEXT
Nasal Augmentation Using Gore-Tex: A 10-Year Experience
Stucker
Arch Facial Plast Surg 1999;1:122-122.
FULL TEXT
|
