You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 10 No. 4, Jul-Aug 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Original Article
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Prognosis/ Outcomes
 •Cosmetic Surgery/ Procedures
 •Nasal Surgery
 •Alert me on articles by topic

Applications of GORE-TEX Implants in Rhinoplasty Reexamined After 17 Years

Krzysztof Conrad, MD, FRCSC, FRCS; Cory Stephen Torgerson, PhD, MD, FRCSC; Grant S. Gillman, MD, FRCSC

Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2008;10(4):224-231.

Objective  To determine the efficacy of GORE-TEX (W. L. Gore & Associates Inc, Flagstaff, Arizona) alloplast in rhinoplasty.

Design  A 17-year retrospective medical chart review at a teaching hospital, community hospital, and private facial cosmetic surgery center. A total of 521 patients (122 male and 399 female; age range, 13-70 years) were followed for 12 months to 17 years. All patients had undergone GORE-TEX implantation rhinoplasty (685 implants in 158 primary procedures and 508 secondary procedures) performed by 1 surgeon. Patient satisfaction, expressed with respect to desired cosmetic benefit and functional outcome, and physician assessment, based on aesthetic improvement, technical considerations, and complications, were evaluated. Results were assessed according to the follow-up notes in the medical chart reflecting patients' and surgeon's comments and full preoperative and postoperative photographic documentation.

Results  GORE-TEX alloplasts, 1 to 10 mm thick, implanted in the nasal dorsum (n = 264), lateral nasal wall (n = 252), supratip dorsum (n = 85), and premaxilla (n = 84) showed excellent stability and tissue tolerance. Biological complications that required implant removal occurred in 1.9% of patients and included infection, soft tissue swelling, migration, and extrusion.

Conclusions  With the exception of the nasal tip, columella, or problems in which corrections would require rigidity of the grafted or implanted material, the GORE-TEX alloplast is a safe, inexpensive, and predictable alternative to autografts. In the present series, more than 95% of implants used were 1 to 4 mm thick. In the remaining 5%, 6 implants ranged from 8 to 10 mm thick, and we found them acceptable. It is our opinion that for both primary and secondary rhinoplasty with adequate endonasal and external soft tissue coverage, GORE-TEX should be strongly considered for major and minor corrections of the nasal wall and bridge in properly selected patients.


Author Affiliations: Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.


RELATED ARTICLE

Highlights of Archives of Facial Plastic Surgery
Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2008;10(4):223.
FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2008 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.