This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Related letter  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Surgery  • Surgical Interventions  • Plastic Surgery  • Facial Plastic Surgery  • Cosmetic Surgery/ Procedures  • Nasal Surgery  • Rhinoplasty  • Alert me on articles by topic

Sam P. Most, MD

Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2009;11(6):426-427.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In reply

I thank Dr Burstin for his interest in my commentary.¹ I had taken this commentary as an opportunity to present some ideas that I have found helpful in my functional rhinoplasty practice. Owing to space constraints, the text may have been a little unclear in a few areas. All the same, I would like to address a few points in his letter.

First, the statement "The classic descriptions of the internal and external nasal valve have served us well over many years, and there does not seem to be any necessity to change this" may be debatable. For example, classically, the internal valve was defined as the angle between the upper lateral cartilage (ULC) and the septum.^2-4 More recently, some authors have also included all structures at the point of minimal cross-sectional area (ie, the septum and anterior inferior turbinate).⁵ However, neither of these . . . [Full Text of this Article]

AUTHOR INFORMATION

RELATED ARTICLE

Trends in Functional Rhinoplasty
Sam P. Most
Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2008;10(6):410-413.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED LETTER

Functional Valvular Indrawing
Perry P. Burstin
Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2009;11(6):426-427.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT