ArticlePDF Available

Fat Grafting to the Nose: Personal Experience with 36 Patients

Authors:
  • Dr. Juan Monreal Private Practice Madrid, Spain

Abstract and Figures

Clinicians are facing an increasing trend toward nonsurgical nose reshaping using synthetic injectables, mainly for patients who refuse standard rhinoplasties. Autologous fat grafting is a safer and convenient alternative to permanent or semipermanent injectables due to better results as well as fewer and milder side effects. The author reports his experience with fat grafting to the nose using his personal technique for 36 consecutive patients. The experience covers primary treatments of noses not treated by surgery, treatment of post rhinoplasty deformities, and combination fat grafting and rhinoplasties. The technique used by the author for fat grafting to the nose does not differ significantly from that used for other body or face areas. It is based in the atraumatic extraction of fat fragments using a multi-orifice cannula and injection of these fragments using 1.4- to 1.6-mm cannulas or needles. In combining rhinoplasties with fat grafting, fat grafts are used in the same location instead of a prosthesis or cartilage grafts. The initial analysis of postoperative results showed a good to high level of patient satisfaction, particularly in primary cases, with virtually no complications or severe side effects. Some easily corrected side effects probably were learning curve dependent. Autologous fat grafting is an effective and reliable technique for aesthetic and reconstructive nose reshaping for patients who refuse surgical treatments. Although optimal results can be achieved with this technique, they are not comparable with those obtained by surgical rhinoplasties, and this is an important issue to discuss with the prospective patient.
Content may be subject to copyright.
CASE REPORT
Fat Grafting to the Nose: Personal Experience with 36 Patients
Juan Monreal
Received: 13 July 2010 / Accepted: 11 February 2011
ÓSpringer Science+Business Media, LLC and International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2011
Abstract
Background Clinicians are facing an increasing trend
toward nonsurgical nose reshaping using synthetic injec-
tables, mainly for patients who refuse standard rhinopla-
sties. Autologous fat grafting is a safer and convenient
alternative to permanent or semipermanent injectables due
to better results as well as fewer and milder side effects.
The author reports his experience with fat grafting to the
nose using his personal technique for 36 consecutive
patients. The experience covers primary treatments of
noses not treated by surgery, treatment of post rhinoplasty
deformities, and combination fat grafting and rhinoplasties.
Methods The technique used by the author for fat grafting
to the nose does not differ significantly from that used for
other body or face areas. It is based in the atraumatic
extraction of fat fragments using a multi-orifice cannula
and injection of these fragments using 1.4- to 1.6-mm
cannulas or needles. In combining rhinoplasties with fat
grafting, fat grafts are used in the same location instead of a
prosthesis or cartilage grafts.
Results The initial analysis of postoperative results
showed a good to high level of patient satisfaction, par-
ticularly in primary cases, with virtually no complications
or severe side effects. Some easily corrected side effects
probably were learning curve dependent.
Conclusions Autologous fat grafting is an effective and
reliable technique for aesthetic and reconstructive nose
reshaping for patients who refuse surgical treatments.
Although optimal results can be achieved with this tech-
nique, they are not comparable with those obtained by
surgical rhinoplasties, and this is an important issue to
discuss with the prospective patient.
Keywords Fat grafting Lipofilling Lipoimplant
Lipostructure Nose
Recent years have found us facing an increasing number of
patients desiring aesthetic improvement of nasal shape
without having to undergo surgical rhinoplasty. Although
surgical rhinoplasty must be the primary indication for any
patient seeking aesthetic improvement of the nose, the
ability to smooth out irregularities or contour deformities
and asymmetries using an injectable material holds great
appeal due to the apparent simplicity of the correction. The
ability to fix a deformity with local or no anesthesia, less
financial expense, and no downtime is appealing. The great
majority of treatments I have witnessed involve the use of
permanent or semipermanent fillers injected in the dorsum,
tip, and columella.
Regarding semipermanent fillers, an acceptable degree
of safety depends on an even and complete resorption, but
some potential complications still must be faced [1,2]. The
patient must forego a permanent result unless he or she has
repeat injections on a regular basis, and if the patient finally
wishes to undergo a standard surgical rhinoplasty, we must
wait for the complete resorption of the implant until sur-
gical planning can be done with confidence. The use of
permanent fillers in the nose poses additional risks of
severe adverse reactions, skin necrosis, and extrusion in
J. Monreal (&)
Sociedad Espan
˜ola de Cirugı
´a Pla
´stica Reparadora y Este
´tica
(SECPRE) (Spanish Society of Plastic, Reconstructive and
Aesthetic Surgery), Asociacio
´n Espan
˜ola de Cirugı
´a Este
´tica
Pla
´stica (AECEP) (Spanish Association of Aesthetic Plastic
Surgery), International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery
(ISAPS), Londres, #54–18D, 28850 Torrejo
´n de Ardoz,
Madrid, Spain
e-mail: drmonreal@drmonreal.info
123
Aesth Plast Surg
DOI 10.1007/s00266-011-9681-4
addition to the almost complete difficulty evacuating the
filler thoroughly and the obvious difficulties in eventual
surgical planning.
I discuss my experience in nonsurgical rhinoplasty using
autologous fat grafting instead of injectable fillers for
patients who refused primary or secondary surgical rhino-
plasties. The discussion also deals with the combination of
open or closed rhinoplasty with fat grafting to paranasal
regions to achieve equal or better results than with cartilage
grafts or solid prostheses in the same regions.
Patients and Methods
Since April 2007, I have analyzed 36 procedures for 33
patients, with a maximum follow-up period of 14 months
(mean, 7 months). For 18 patients, nasal lipoimplantations
were performed as the unique method of improving nasal
aesthetics whether surgery had been performed previously
or not (Figs. 1,2,3). The patients in these cases always
refused a standard rhinoplasty although they all were
informed and advised about the differences in final results,
limitations, and aesthetic improvements associated with
each technique. All the patients acknowledged the limita-
tions of lipoimplantation compared with surgical
rhinoplasty.
The remaining 15 patients underwent nasal lipoim-
plantation as a complement to surgical rhinoplasty (open or
closed) with the aim of reshaping the bony dorsum, radix,
glabella, or premaxillary region (Fig. 4). Traditionally,
patients presenting with short nasal bones, frontal reces-
sion, or premaxillary retrusion have been treated with
cartilage grafts or a solid prosthesis during rhinoplasties to
supplement deficient bone in this area. In this study, fat
grafts were used instead of cartilage or prosthesis to sup-
plement deficient bone so their efficacy could be assessed.
Nasal reshaping performed with lipoimplantation alone
was performed with the patient under local anesthesia
using 3–12 ml of fat harvested from the lower abdomen or
inner thighs. All lipoimplantations performed in combina-
tion with rhinoplasties were done with the patient under
general anesthesia using 6–12 ml of fat harvested from the
same areas. Due to severe postrhinoplasty deformities,
three patients needed an additional procedure to refine the
final result (Fig. 1).
Follow-up visits were scheduled at 7 days, 15 days,
3 months, 6 months, and 12 months, although unfortu-
nately, it was not easy to get patients back in the office after
postoperative month 6. Basic analysis including changes in
volume and shape, aesthetic improvement, and patient
satisfaction was performed by comparison with pre- and
postoperative control photographs.
Nasal Danger Zones
The arterial supply of the nose is derived from the oph-
thalmic and facial arteries (Fig. 5). The ophthalmic artery
arises from the internal carotid just as that vessel is
emerging from the cavernous sinus. The central retinal
artery is the first and one of the smaller branches of the
ophthalmic artery. The ophthalmic artery terminates in two
branches: the supratrochlear artery and the dorsal nasal
artery. The dorsal nasal artery emerges from the orbit
above the medial palpebral ligament and divides into two
branches. The first branch crosses the root of the nose and
anastomoses with the angular artery. The other branch runs
along the dorsum of the nose, supplying its outer surface in
its route toward the nasal tip, and anastomoses with its
fellow artery of the opposite side and with the lateral nasal
branch of the facial artery.
The lateral nasal artery is derived from the facial artery
as that vessel ascends along the side of the nose. It supplies
the ala and dorsum of the nose, anastomosing with its
Fig. 1 a, c Preoperative view of a patient after a previous rhinoplasty
performed by another surgeon. b, d Postoperative view at 6 months
showing nasal lipoimplantation and touch-up procedure to improve
dorsal and tip contours
Aesth Plast Surg
123
fellow, with the septal and alar branches, with the dorsal
nasal branch of the ophthalmic artery, and with the infra-
orbital branch of the internal maxillary. Finally, the colu-
mellar artery, a branch of the superior labial artery, runs up
the columella, ending and anastomosing in the tip with
branches of the lateral nasal artery.
From this anatomic review, we can obtain the main
conclusions. The proximal blood supply of the nose has
direct and short connections with the internal carotid and
retinal arteries. This means that embolization of this net-
work during injection in the area of the dorsum, radix, or
glabella can cause a variety of disastrous consequences
such as blindness or brain infraction [1,3]. The distal blood
supply, mainly at the tip and in alar regions, also can be
affected by embolization, causing a variety of ischemic
phenomena.
Fig. 2 Preoperative (a) and postoperative views 2 weeks (b),
6 months (c), and 14 months (d) after nasal lipoimplantation to
improve tip and dorsum contours
Fig. 3 Preoperative (a) and
postoperative views 5 months
(b) and 12 months (c) after
nasal lipoimplantation to correct
slight dorsal deviation and
pinching of the tip
Fig. 4 Preoperative and 12-month postoperative views of combined
open rhinoplasty and lipoimplantation to the premaxillary area for
improvement of facial profile and nasal base proportions
Aesth Plast Surg
123
Thus, it is of outmost importance to follow the same
strict principles in performing fat grafting to the nose as
would be followed for any other facial region if serious
complications are to be avoided. Use of blunt-tip cannulas
whenever possible reduces the chance of perforating the
arterial wall and thus cannulating the arterial lumen.
Applying soft pressure to the plunger of the syringe helps
to deposit the smallest fat fragments possible and also to
reduce the chance of propelling the fat through the arterial
lumen in the event it is cannulated.
Unfortunately, at least in my experience, fat grafting to
the nose for some patients with previous surgery is more
challenging for two main reasons. First, the blood supply
architecture usually is distorted and the tissue planes less
identifiable. Second, fat grafting through blunt-tip cannulas
can be difficult due to severe soft tissue scarring and
adherence, particularly over the nasal dorsum. Only in this
case do I perform fat grafting with 18-gauge needles.
Technical Details
The fat grafting to the nose that I perform does not differ
much from the technique used for other body areas and
reported previously [46] including treatment of perinasal
areas such as the premaxillary region [6]. The technique
consists basically of atraumatic harvesting of fat fragments
with the patient under local anesthesia using a 3-mm multi-
orifice cannula (Fig. 6) attached to a 10-ml syringe. This
type of cannula allows harvesting of 2- to 3-mm fat frag-
ments with ease.
Usually, it is not necessary to obtain more than 12 ml of
fat ready for injection to treat the whole nose and perinasal
areas. This usually means that the clinician needs to harvest
at least 24 ml of lipoaspirate due to the loss of tissue during
the washing and decanting process. Harvested fat is washed
with Ringer lactate and allowed to decant for 20 min. Once
decanted, fat can be cautiously passed to smaller syringes
of 1 or 2.5 ml for easily handling.
Fat is injected routinely in a retrograde manner using
1.2- to 1.4-mm blunt-tip cannulas and applying very gentle
pressure on the plunger. I use conventional 18-gauge nee-
dles only when dealing with highly adherent or fibrous
tissues in the nasal dorsum of patients who have undergone
previous surgery. Conventional sharp needles need not be
used in primary cases. They pose an additional risk of
intravascular injection with disastrous consequences. In
any case, the clinician must have in mind all danger zones
and vascular territories of the nose to prevent an unwanted
intravascular injection. In dealing with the supratip and
glabellar region, special care must be taken in introducing a
cannula or needle from the tip because these approaches
pose the greatest risk.
The clinician can take advantage of two main tissue
planes when injecting fat in the nose. The submuscular
aponeurotic system (SMAS) plane is present along the
entire nasal dorsum and has continuity with the radix and
glabella. The subcutaneous plane also is useful in the
dorsum, and it is the only plane to be found over the tip and
lateral crura of the lower lateral cartilages. In secondary
cases, the clinician should be cautious because this plane
probably will not be found with ease, and different degrees
of fibrosis will impair cannula advancement and fat
placement. The clinician should always try to evaluate and
remember the vascular anatomy of the patient’s nose and
Fig. 5 Main arterial supply to the nose and danger zones regarding
fat injection (arrows). STA supratrochelar artery, DNA dorsal nasal
artery, AA angular artery, IOA infraorbital artery, LNA lateral nasal
artery. LA superior labial artery, FA facial artery
Fig. 6 Cannulas used by the author since 1998 to perform atraumatic
harvest of 2- to 3-mm fat fragments
Aesth Plast Surg
123
glabellar area to avoid severe complications such us
intravascular injection of fat.
Unlike other body and face areas, the soft tissues of the
nose do not allow the creation of a three-dimensional mesh.
For this reason, caution is needed in performing fat injec-
tion, both in the quantity and the location. Due to the rel-
atively small caliber of the cannulas and needles used in
nasal fat grafting, the clinician can choose whatever access
point is needed. However, it is preferable to avoid entering
the nasal skin directly or near the principal arterial trunks
of the nose. I usually perform fat grafting to the nose under
a regional block of the nose, avoiding direct infiltration of
nasal tissues to avoid any distortion of profile. Once the
procedure is completed, I routinely do not use any splint or
tape to immobilize nasal tissues.
For the current series of patients, the nasal lipoimplan-
tations performed in combination with rhinoplasties fol-
lowed the principles described once the rhinoplasty was
finished and all the wounds were closed. The glabellar
region, the radix, and the premaxillary region were treated
individually if deficient to improve the final nasal profile.
The glabella and radix were approached from the middle
frontal region 1 cm above the eyebrows, and the premax-
illary region [6] was approached from the nasolabial fold
2 cm lateral to the nasal ala. In contrast to the technique
described by Ca
´rdenas and Carvajal [7], I do not place fat
parcels in the dorsal nasal skin of these patients, but only in
the radix, glabella, and piriform aperture, with the aim of
adding volume if deficient to further enhance nasal profile
and proportions. Final nasal dressings and splinting were
done as usual at the end of the rhinoplasty.
Results
The follow-up visits and control photographs were sched-
uled at 24 h, 7 days, 15 days, 3 months, and 12 months for
evaluation of improvement and stability of results. For the
nasal lipoimplantations performed in combination with
rhinoplasties, dorsal splints were removed at 7 days, and
follow-up visits were scheduled at the same intervals.
After 24 h, nasal swelling was mild, with nearly com-
plete absence of equimosis in primary cases. Patients were
happy to resume daily activities and daily work in a fairly
short time. Lipoimplantations performed for patients with
previous surgery showed a bit more swelling and equimosis
than in primary cases. When combined with rhinoplasties,
the degree of swelling and equimosis was equivalent to that
of cases managed without associated lipoimplantation
except in the glabellar area.
Grafted fat volume slowly decreased over the first
15 days after treatment and until the first month but
showed a high degree of stability thereafter. After
4–5 months, no patient showed changes in contour or
volume. The percentage of final graft take was difficult to
calculate due to the small volumes used, but based on
control photographs, it was estimated to be 60% in sec-
ondary cases and 75% in primary cases.
Patient satisfaction was good to high in 80% of cases,
particularly in cases of post rhinoplasty deformity. Only
two patients were disappointed, expecting more profound
changes from this technique. Only three patients presenting
with severe post rhinoplasty deformities needed a touch-up
procedure to add volume to an originally highly depressed
and adhered dorsal skin and to two under projected and
scarred tips that could not receive all the fat volume
required in the first procedure. Swelling improvement in
combined cases did not differ much from that in rhino-
plasty cases with no lipoimplantation.
Beside pure modeling capabilities, fat grafts offer pro-
ven biologic benefits in cases of scarred, pigmented, and
other skin disorders. It was not the purpose of this study to
evaluate the biologic improvements provided by fat graft-
ing to the nose. Nonetheless, I have witnessed improve-
ments in skin quality, particularly in pigmentations,
adherences, and texture, which were more evident after
treatment of secondary cases (Fig. 3). Specific studies are
needed for objective evaluation and measurement of these
findings.
The current series of patients experienced no compli-
cations or untoward results that required additional treat-
ment or surgical interventions. Only in one combined case
did minimal displacement of the grafted fat in the radix
occur, probably caused during the nasal splinting. This
complication was easily treated without major conse-
quences. None of the patients experienced significant
changes in body weight during the follow-up period, so the
impact of body weight changes in fat graft behavior could
not be evaluated. Patients who reported functional or
obstructive airway problems were informed about the
inefficacy of fat grafting to correct the symptoms. No new
symptoms of airway obstruction or worsening of previous
symptoms were noticed in any patient.
Discussion
The tendency of patients to seek minimally invasive cos-
metic treatments also reaches nasal aesthetics. Nonsurgical
rhinoplasty, also called medical rhinoplasty, has been
performed traditionally using permanent or semipermanent
injectable fillers [2]. With semipermanent fillers, the
patient must forego a permanent result unless he or she
repeats the injections on a regular basis. The use of per-
manent fillers makes it impossible or quite difficult to
remove the implant completely or to accomplish proper
Aesth Plast Surg
123
safe surgical planning in the event that the patient desires
an eventual surgical rhinoplasty. In either case, complica-
tions arising from the use of injectable fillers are already
known. Some disastrous complications reported in the lit-
erature include blindness and strokes [3]. Other local
complications are intolerance, granulomas, extrusion, and a
subtotal necrosis tip or nasal ala.
Fat grafting to the nose must not be considered a risk-
free technique because potential complications can be
devastating. The use of fat grafting removes certain filler-
dependent side effects such as the need to repeat treatments
in the long term, intolerance or rejection of foreign mate-
rial, or difficulty planning in the event that a patient
eventually needs or wants a surgical rhinoplasty. Emboli-
zation of the arterial nasal network, a technique-dependent
complication that can occur with fat grafting and also with
other injectable fillers, has been well documented previ-
ously [3]. Therefore, to prevent its occurrence, every
plastic surgeon dealing with this technique must have a
thorough knowledge of the nasal arterial network and soft
tissue anatomy. In this sense, arterial embolization of the
angular or dorsal nasal artery in a cranial direction (via the
tip approach) will cause immediate pain, blindness, or
stroke, whereas arterial embolization of the dorsal nasal
artery or lateral nasal artery in a caudal direction (via the
glabellar, radix, or lateral alar approach) will cause
necrosis of soft tissues to a variable degree. Using a proper
technique that includes injection with blunt cannulas
whenever possible, very gentle pressure applied on the
syringe plunger, and placement of fat parcels in a retro-
grade manner is mandatory when nasal fat grafting is
performed.
It is essential to understand that true nasal modeling is
obtained through improving architectural elements of bone
and cartilage, leaving soft tissues to adapt to changes and
draw the final result. Autologous fat grafting applied to
nasal aesthetics works oppositely by altering only soft
tissues to mask architectural imbalances or irregularities
except when it is used in combination with rhinoplasty to
supplement deficient bone in the radix, glabella, and pre-
maxillary region. In these later cases, fat grafting has
worked with the same efficacy as cartilage grafts or solid
prostheses in the same locations. Obviously, we will face
patients with bone or cartilage architectures that cannot be
camouflaged by fat grafts, for example, patients with a
coarse boxy tip, an over projected tip, or a tension nose.
For these reasons autologous fat grafting to the nose is an
indication only for some selected nasal deformities of
patients who refuse rhinoplasty as the primary choice and
understand clearly the limitations in the final results.
Based on the biologic improvements I have observed in
secondary cases, fat grafting to the nose could be the first
choice for some selected cases in which a high degree of
scarring or adherence might jeopardize dissection or blood
supply during open or closed rhinoplasty. Fat grafts have
demonstrated the ability to release tightly adherent skin in
a way that provides better conditions and makes secondary
surgical rhinoplasty safer.
Some other authors have previously reported their per-
sonal experiences with fat grafting to the nose [710].
Ca
´rdenas and Carvajal [7] reported the use of lipoinjection
of the nasal dorsum in combination with open rhinoplasties
to obtain smooth dorsal contours with good results. Cole-
man [8] gave a thorough description of his nasal fat
grafting technique in his last book, and Duskova et al. [10]
reported their experience with cleft nose refinement.
Conclusions
Surgical rhinoplasty must be the primary approach for
patients seeking aesthetic improvement of the nose. Fillers or
fat grafts are no substitute for an adequate surgical technique
and will never provide better results. Nonetheless, autolo-
gous fat grafting also shows itself as a first-line nonsurgical
alternative to the modeling of nasal shape and profile in
primary and secondary cases of patients who refuse surgical
rhinoplasties and accept limitations in the results. The aes-
thetic nasal and paranasal units can be treated as a whole or as
aesthetic subunits individually as needed. It also is possible
to combine surgical rhinoplasty with lipoimplantation in the
dorsum, radix, glabella, or premaxillary area to improve
volume and shape in these areas without the need to use
cartilage grafts or solid prostheses.
The described approach to nasal remodeling uses an
easy, safe, and reliable procedure that lacks serious com-
plications, side effects, or untoward results if properly
performed. However, it is technically demanding if good
results are to be obtained and serious complications are to
be avoided. Unlike permanent injectable fillers, autologous
fat grafts do not pose any risk or difficulties in terms of
planning or performing an eventual rhinoplasty throughout
the patient’s lifetime.
Conflicts of interest The author declares that he has no conflicts of
interest to disclose.
References
1. Winslow CP (2009) The management of dermal filler compli-
cations. Facial Plast Surg 25:124–128
2. Humphrey CD, Arkins JP, Dayan SH (2009) Soft tissue fillers in
the nose. Aesthet Surg J 29:477–484 Erratum in Aesthet Surg J
30:119, 2010
3. Egido JA, Arroyo R, Marcos A, Jime
´nez-Alfaro I (1993) Middle
cerebral artery embolism and unilateral visual loss after autolo-
gous fat injection into the glabellar area. Stroke 24:615–616
Aesth Plast Surg
123
4. Monreal J (2003) Fat tissue as a permanent implant: new
instruments and refinements. Aesthet Surg J 23:213–216
5. Monreal J (2005) Instrumental alternativo en los injertos de grasa
auto
´loga. Cir Plast Iberlatinamer 31–32:137–146
6. Monreal J (2008) Injerto de Grasa en Fosa Piriforme. Revista de
la AECEP, no 8, 27–30 Diciembre 2008
7. Ca
´rdenas JC, Carvajal J (2007) Refinement of rhinoplasty with
lipoinjection. Aesthet Plast Surg 31:501–505
8. Coleman SR (2009) Fat injection: from filling to regeneration.
Quality Medical Publishing, Inc, St. Louis, pp 423–447
9. Ellenbogen R (2000) Fat transfer: current use in practice
(review). Clin Plast Surg 27:545–556
10. Duskova M, Kristen M (2004) Augmentation by autologous
adipose tissue in cleft lip and nose: part 1. Final aesthetic touches
in clefts. J Craniofac Surg 15:478–481 discussion 482
Aesth Plast Surg
123
... In the nineteenth century, nonsurgical rhinoplasty was performed for the first time to treat saddle nose deformity. 5 Even though surgery is the first choice in rhinoplasty, 6 recent studies showed that non-surgical techniques can be a reliable alternative for rhinoplasty especially in secondary rhinoplasty. 6,7 And by offering these techniques physicians are providing patients with less invasive, more economic, and an alternative technique for non-surgical candidates. ...
... 5 Even though surgery is the first choice in rhinoplasty, 6 recent studies showed that non-surgical techniques can be a reliable alternative for rhinoplasty especially in secondary rhinoplasty. 6,7 And by offering these techniques physicians are providing patients with less invasive, more economic, and an alternative technique for non-surgical candidates. 8 The regenerative properties of fat grafts has been always an evolving paradigm and a subject of intense research. ...
... 10 Thus lipofilling is a potential filler of reference for rhinoplasty. 11 And it can be performed on the dorsum, radix, glabella, pre-maxilla, 6 and nasal pyramid. 11 Despite the increasing demand for non-surgical techniques in rhinoplasty, only few articles discuss nose lipofilling in secondary rhinoplasty. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Rhinoplasty is a commonly performed cosmetic surgery. Clinicians are facing an increased demand on non-surgical procedures, therefore liquid rhinoplasty is gaining popularity. Given the characteristic of lipofilling to rejuvenate and improve skin texture, fat grafting can be used to reshape the nose in secondary rhinoplasty. Methods Fat was injected in 27 patients with a mean age of 42 years. Volume of fat ranged from 1.5 to 4.5 cc with a mean of 2.2 cc. Patients were seen at 1 week, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year. Patient satisfaction was measured using the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation questionnaire and plastic surgeons’ evaluation. Results After 1 year follow up, 20 patients were satisfied with the results at 1 year. The aesthetic outcome was noted as very good in 11 patients, good in 9 patients, and poor in 3 patients. Most of the patients had an improvement in skin texture with trophic effect on the skin .No complications were seen in our series Conclusion According to this study, nasal lipofilling is a safe and efficacious filler in secondary rhinoplasty. However, more studies are needed to assess the indications and limitations of nose lipofilling. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
... Autologous fat grafting has become an important method for volume augmentation and tissue reconstruction, largely owing to several advantages of adipose tissue: abundance, ease of acquisition, and absence of a graft rejection reaction [3,4]. However, the rigid support capacity of adipose tissue remains unsatisfactory for some clinical applications, grafting in the nasal base and chin [5,6]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Due to the low percentage of collagen, the rigid support capacity of fat grafts remains unsatisfactory for some clinical applications. In this study, we evaluated a strategy in which adipose matrix complex (AMC) was collected via a mechanical process and transplanted for supportive filling of the face. Our AMC samples were collected from adipose tissue by a filter device consisting of a sleeve, three internal sieves, and a filter bag (100 mesh). AMC derived from adipose tissue had fewer cells than Coleman fat, but much higher levels of collagen and stiffness. Retention rates 90 days after transplantation in nude mice were higher for AMC than for Coleman fat (75±7.5% vs. 42±13.5%; P < 0.05). In addition, AMC maintained a higher stiffness (~6 kPa vs. ~2 kPa; P < 0.01) and stably retained a higher level of collagen. Our findings demonstrate that mechanical collection of AMC from adipose tissue is a practical method for improving fat graft retention and rigid support. This strategy has the potential to improve the quality of lipoaspirates for patients requiring rigid supportive filling.
Article
Full-text available
The nose, centrally located on the face, plays a crucial role in facial aesthetics. Any imbalance in its length, width, tip position, or a gross deformity, such as dorsal hump and deviation, can significantly affect the overall facial harmony, which is thus a major concern for patients. When it comes to minor deformities, they have been treated with hyaluronic acid, toxin injection, and thread insertion since 2005. This study has originally been carried out to review the published medical literature on the non-surgical techniques for Medical Nose Reshaping (MNR): a PubMed search was carried out in December 2020 using the search terms: “Nose [and] filler”, “Nose [and] botulinum toxin” and “Nose [and] thread”. A large number of studies were identified and reviewed, and it was found that rhinoplasty remains the gold standard to correct nose defects; nevertheless, MNR is gaining popularity due to its minimal invasiveness, short downtime, and the market availability of different injectables, toxins, and threads. This study aims to provide an evidence-based approach to guide the use of non-surgical techniques for MNR by reviewing published medical literature and drawing on the authors’ experience.
Article
Full-text available
The aim of this article is to provide high-quality evidence on patient satisfaction and complications of two non-surgical rhinoplasty procedures. All available online literature up to 2021 were searched utilizing keywords and MESH search phrases also used in the online databases. In addition, the reference lists of the systematic reviews included in the study were manually searched. The studies with greatest evidence were included to assess patient satisfaction and complication. Critical evaluation of the articles was done and MINORS scale was used for bias determination. Temporary redness in the skin, fluid accumulation, discoloration of skin, and post-procedure discomfort were all transient problems in all of the investigations. Vascular limitations and hematoma were identified as rare consequences. Non-surgical rhinoplasty treatments are both a good and less intrusive alternative to traditional rhinoplasty. However, there is a scarcity of experimental and prospective studies, so more number of trials to be carried out to determine the precision, efficacy, and adverse effects of non-surgical rhinoplasty.
Article
Introduction : Non-surgical rhinoplasty is one of the terms used to describe the technique of injecting fillers into the nasal pyramid region for aesthetic, and sometimes functional, purposes. Although it is now an extremely popular practice, the techniques proposed and the products used are different. This inhomogeneity is also found regarding the treatment longevity. Method : A literature review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PRISMA). It was realized to collect information on this disputed topic. Pubmed/MEDLINE database was explored. Results : A total of 228 articles were extracted from the basic literature search. 81 of these were excluded based on the content of the title and abstract. All 147 remaining articles were submitted for full-reading. 49 of these were excluded because the injection product used by the authors was not a hyaluronic acid based filler; while 82 of these were excluded because they provided no indication regarding the longevity of the treatment. Of the 16 selected studies, according to six authors, the duration of treatment is therefore between 8 and 12 months. For all the others, instead, the results seem to last longer than this period. The longest time interval was 8 years. Discussion and Conclusion : Establishing with certainty the longevity of non-surgical rhinoplasty seemed to be extremely complex. In the light of this discordant data seems to be essential to deepen the argument. A study using imaging techniques and/or standardized photographic material appears essential to further investigate this controversial topic.
Article
Rhinoplasty is one of the most popular aesthetic surgeries worldwide and often includes grafting techniques to achieve optimal results. One of these grafting techniques is autologous fat transfer, which has been used to increase volume, camouflage irregularities, and/or improve the quality of the nasal skin soft tissue envelope. Moreover, minimally-invasive approaches for altering the nasal appearance have recently increased and become known as "liquid" or "non-surgical rhinoplasty." These non-surgical approaches include altering the nasal appearance with filler injection to induce volumetric changes in lieu of extensive surgery. The use of fat grafting as a filler is favorable to achieve well-balanced aesthetic results without compromising the nasal skin soft tissue envelope. This capability is partly because of the regenerative potential of fat grafts, serving to improve the quality of surrounding soft tissues. In contrast, commercial injectable fillers are inert. This article highlights the role of fat grafting in surgical and non-surgical rhinoplasty to provide surgeons with an overview of the potential of these vastly abundant, biocompatible, and cost-effective grafts.
Article
Full-text available
Autologous fat is ideal soft tissue filler. It is easily accessible, biocompatible, cheap, and it provides both volume augmentation and skin quality improvement. Fat grafting has been used since 1893, but it has only gained widespread popularity since the development of modern liposuction by Colemann and Illouz in the 1980s. Every year more than half a million facial fat grafting procedures are carried out worldwide and the trend is rapidly increasing. Overall, general complications associated with facial fat grafting are assumed to be around 2%. Is that true? Material and Methods: Until July 2021, a systematic search of the literature was performed interrogating PubMed search engines. The following algorithm was used for the research: (fat graft OR lipofilling) AND face AND complications. Exclusion criteria applied hierarchically were review articles, not reporting recipient site complications; not in English and paediatric population. Abstracts were manually screened by LS, GS, JM and PDS separately and subsequently matched for accuracy. Pertinent full-text articles were retrieved and analysed and data were extracted from the database. The flow chart of article selection is described following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Results: In total, 462 papers were identified by PubMed search. A total of 359 were excluded: 38 papers were not in English, 41 were review articles, 279 articles did not report recipient site complications and 1 was not on human subjects. Average complication rate ranged from 1.5% to 81.4%. A total of 298 adverse events were identified: 40 (13.4%) intravascular injections, 13 (4.3%) asymmetry, 57 (19.1%) irregularities, 22 (7.4%) graft hypertrophy, 21 (7%) fat necrosis, 73 (24.5%) prolonged oedema, 1 (0.3%) infection, 6 (2%) prolonged erythema, 15 (5%) telangiectasia and 50 (16.8%) cases of acne activation. Conclusions: FFG related side effects could be resumed in three categories: severe, moderate, and minor. Severe (13.4%) side effects such as intravascular injection or migration require neurological or neurosurgical management and often lead to permanent disability or death. Moderate (38.3%) side effects such as fat hypertrophy, necrosis, cyst formation, irregularities and asymmetries require a retouch operation. Minor (48.3%) side effects such as prolonged oedema or erythema require no surgical management. Despite the fact that the overall general complication rate of facial fat grafting is assumed to be around 2%, the real complication rate of facial fat grafting is unknown due to a lack of reporting and the absence of consensus on side effect definition and identification. More RCTs are necessary to further determine the real complication rate of this procedure.
Article
Full-text available
The “permanence” of fat as long-term implant material is a fact that, while controversial for many plastic surgeons, has been proven in clinical practice and in histologic studies. The goal of this article is to describe, first, the technique used by the author for transplanting autologous fat, and second, the instru- ments designed for performing such transplants with increased reliability.This technique is based on the atraumatic extraction under low pressure of 1.5 to 2 mm fat parcels with 3 and 4 mm multi-orifice cannulas designed specially for this procedure. Fat processing includes washing and decantation, but not cen- trifuging. The injection of this tiny fat parcels is performed with special 2 and 2,5 mm blunted tip cannula in multiple pla- nes. Analysis of the described procedure involved 103 lipoim- plants performed on 86 patients since April 1998, with follow up time ranging from 12 to 49 months. The average permanen- ce in all cases was 70% of the implanted volume, with the exception of lip augmentation, where the permanence after 12 months was no better than 50%. Autologous fat grafting with these new instruments and technique is a safe, long lasting and simple procedure reliable for all cases in which volume aug- mentation with autologous material is advisable.
Article
Full-text available
The author presents guidelines and new instruments for transplanting autologous fat. He describes this procedure as effective, predictable, and reliable when performed with careful donor-zone preparation, atraumatic fat extraction, anaerobic sterility, and precise placement in a properly prepared receiving zone. (Aesthetic Surg J 2003;23:213-216.).
Article
The author has used fat transfer, including pearl fat grafts and fat injections, for almost 18 years in practice. Techniques for pearl fat grafting and fat injections are described. Pearls are limited to eyelids and small depressions. Fat injections can be used to augment various facial areas, including chin, cheekbones, nasolabial folds, lips, labiomandibular folds, glabella, forehead, and nose.
Article
Using soft tissue fillers to correct postrhinoplasty deformities in the nose is appealing. Fillers are minimally invasive and can potentially help patients who are concerned with the financial expense, anesthetic risk, or downtime generally associated with a surgical intervention. A variety of filler materials are currently available and have been used for facial soft tissue augmentation. Of these, hyaluronic acid (HA) derivatives, calcium hydroxylapatite gel (CaHA), and silicone have most frequently been used for treating nasal deformities. While effective, silicone is known to cause severe granulomatous reactions in some patients and should be avoided. HA and CaHA are likely safer, but still may occasionally lead to complications such as infection, thinning of the skin envelope, and necrosis. Nasal injection technique must include sub-SMAS placement to eliminate visible or palpable nodularity. Restricting the use of fillers to the nasal dorsum and sidewalls minimizes complications because more adverse events occur after injections to the nasal tip and alae. We believe that HA and CaHA are acceptable for the treatment of postrhinoplasty deformities in carefully selected patients; however, patients who are treated must be followed closely for complications. The use of any soft tissue filler in the nose should always be approached with great caution and with a thorough consideration of a patient's individual circumstances.
Article
Injectable fillers have gained widespread acceptance among the public and provide a nonsurgical means of rejuvenating the face. As the demand for fillers increases, facial plastic surgeons must become not only expert injectors but also experts in managing the complications of fillers. Little scientific data exists regarding the incidence of complications, and more adverse effects may be seen with longer-term follow-up of patients. The purpose of this article is to review the most commonly encountered complications and management thereof.
Article
The author has used fat transfer, including pearl fat grafts and fat injections, for almost 18 years in practice. Techniques for pearl fat grafting and fat injections are described. Pearls are limited to eyelids and small depressions. Fat injections can be used to augment various facial areas, including chin, cheekbones, nasolabial folds, lips, labiomandibular folds, glabella, forehead, and nose.
Article
Although patients with a cleft lip and palate undergo many surgeries and other therapeutic procedures in the course of their treatment, many are still deeply concerned with their handicap and continue searching for perfection in their appearance. Augmentation using the subject's own fat cells involves minor invasion, is readily available, is an unpretentious method regarding time and cost, and has no contraindications. This method can serve to supplement a hypotrophic scarred upper lip and nasal columella, and by improving the volume, it induces a more natural contour, which reduces the stigmatizing deformity as well as the visibility of externally apparent scars. Using this approach, five patients with a complete cleft have been treated. The median follow-up interval is 22 months (through January 2003). The procedure and postoperative course had a pleasing outcome and were without any complications. The disadvantage was the temporary effect of the outcome, which necessitated repeated application every 7 months on average.