Learning Center: RHINOPLASTY

Access information in greater detail.

Use the search tool or scroll down for your topic of interest.

IS RHINOPLASTY RIGHT FOR YOU?

In brief

Rhinoplasty is surgery that changes the shape of the nose, and it is often combined with septoplasty or other work inside the nose to improve breathing. Patient-reported satisfaction improves substantially after surgery in pooled studies, but the final shape takes about a year to settle, and roughly one primary rhinoplasty in twenty is revised. The best candidates have specific, realistic goals and a nose whose growth is complete. The shape of the chin, the strength of the nasal valves, and the thickness of the skin all affect what can be achieved and are part of planning.

Goals and expectations

Most people who consider rhinoplasty can name one or two features that bother them: a hump on the bridge, a tip that looks large or droops, a nose that bends to one side, or nostrils that look wide. A clear, specific goal is the most useful starting point. The American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) clinical practice guideline on rhinoplasty recommends that every candidate be asked about motivations and expectations, be told whether those expectations are realistic, and be evaluated for nasal airway obstruction before surgery, because a change in shape can affect breathing for better or worse [1].

Realistic expectations include several points that are well documented:

  • Swelling hides the result for months. In a three-dimensional imaging study of open rhinoplasty, about two-thirds of nasal swelling resolved in the first month, 95% by 6 months, and 97.5% by 1 year [2]. The tip, especially in thicker skin, is the last area to settle. The guideline recommends judging satisfaction with both appearance and breathing no earlier than 12 months after surgery [1]. More on the early weeks is on the rhinoplasty recovery expectations page.

  • The nose is part of a face, not a separate object. Facial asymmetry, chin position, and skin thickness limit how "straight," "small," or "defined" a nose can look. These are discussed in the sections below.

  • Some patients need more than one operation. Revision rates are covered under cost below.

Body dysmorphic disorder

Body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) is a psychiatric condition in which a person is preoccupied with a perceived flaw in appearance that others see as slight or do not notice, to the point that it causes distress or interferes with daily life. It matters in rhinoplasty because rhinoplasty is the cosmetic operation most often sought by people with BDD, and their satisfaction after surgery tends to be lower. A 2023 meta-analysis of 18 studies (2,132 rhinoplasty candidates) found that 32.7% screened positive for BDD; the figure depends heavily on the questionnaire used and reflects symptoms on screening rather than formal diagnosis [3]. In a Belgian study of 226 rhinoplasty candidates, 33% had at least moderate BDD symptoms, and symptom severity was unrelated to how abnormal independent observers judged the nose to be [4]. A follow-up study of 166 patients showed that more severe BDD symptoms before surgery predicted lower satisfaction with nasal shape at 3 and 12 months after surgery [5].

The AAO-HNS guideline lists BDD among the conditions that can modify or contraindicate rhinoplasty [1]. Brief validated screening questionnaires exist; one, the 7-item BDD Questionnaire–Aesthetic Surgery, takes 1 to 2 minutes to complete [6]. A positive screen is not a verdict. It is a reason to slow down, talk more, and sometimes involve a mental-health professional before any decision about surgery.

Age and nasal growth

The nose grows through adolescence. A systematic review of growth studies estimated that 98% of girls have finished nasal growth by about 15.8 years and 98% of boys by about 16.9 years, and concluded that rhinoseptoplasty can be performed safely after about age 16 in girls and 17 in boys [7]. The AAO-HNS guideline applies to patients aged 15 and older [1]. Earlier surgery is sometimes appropriate for a significant breathing problem or after injury, but purely cosmetic changes are usually deferred until growth is complete and the patient, not only the parent, wants the change.

How satisfied are patients?

The Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) is a validated six-question survey scored from 0 to 100, with higher scores meaning greater satisfaction with appearance and its social and emotional effects. A 2024 meta-analysis of 17 studies found a mean ROE of 33.5 before surgery, 69.6 within 6 months, and 80.3 at 12 months [8]. An earlier meta-analysis found that satisfaction improved after combined cosmetic and functional rhinoplasty, with the largest gains in younger patients and at 6 to 12 months of follow-up [9]. Most of these studies are observational and come from experienced centers, so they describe what is achievable rather than what is guaranteed.

THE EFFECT OF THE CHIN ON APPARENT NOSE SIZE

In profile, the nose and chin are judged together. A chin that sits back (a weak or retruded chin) makes the nose look longer and more prominent; a well-projected chin makes the same nose look smaller and better balanced. For this reason, facial plastic surgeons assess the forehead, nose, lips, and chin as one profile, using reference lines drawn from the nasal tip to the chin. In a series of 426 rhinoplasty patients analyzed this way, the authors separated noses that were out of proportion in an otherwise balanced face from noses in an unbalanced profile; in the second group, treatment included repositioning the jaw or chin rather than changing the nose alone, and 72 patients had orthognathic (jaw) surgery or genioplasty alongside rhinoplasty [10].

Chin deformities are common among people seeking rhinoplasty, and a review of chin surgery as an adjunct to rhinoplasty recommends identifying them before surgery so that chin augmentation, advancement, or reduction can be planned at the same time [11]. Small changes matter. In a perception study in which the chin of a profile photograph was moved in 2 mm steps, orthodontists, surgeons, art students, and laypeople rated profiles with the chin within 2 mm of the reference position as attractive, whereas retrusions of 4 and 6 mm were not [12]. In 90 patients who had rhinoplasty and genioplasty in the same operation, chin position was stable within 1 mm at 3 years [13].

In practical terms, a person who wants a "smaller nose" sometimes gets a more natural result from a modest change in the nose plus a stronger chin than from a large reduction of the nose alone. Over-reducing the nose to compensate for a weak chin can also narrow the airway. Options include a chin implant, a sliding genioplasty (repositioning the chin bone), and, for temporary or small changes, filler. These are explained in the Learning Center page on the chin and on the chin treatments page.

SPECIFIC NASAL FEATURES AND RHINOPLASTY OPTIONS

The nose has three zones: the bony upper third (nasal bones), the cartilage middle third (the upper lateral cartilages, which join the septum along the bridge), and the lower third (the tip and nostrils, shaped by the paired lower lateral cartilages). Each feature below lives mainly in one zone, and many noses have more than one. The anatomy is illustrated on the nose and sinus anatomy page, and before-and-after considerations are on making the most of nasal aesthetics.

Surgical approach: open, closed, and preservation

  • Open (external) rhinoplasty adds a small incision across the columella, the strip of skin between the nostrils, so the skin can be lifted and the cartilages seen directly. Closed (endonasal) rhinoplasty works through incisions inside the nostrils. A 2025 meta-analysis of 12 comparative studies (1,067 patients) found no significant difference between the two in satisfaction (ROE), breathing scores, swelling, bruising, operating time, or complications [14]. One prospective study found less appearance-related distress during recovery after closed surgery, with equal final outcomes [15]. The choice depends on what needs to be changed and on the surgeon's experience.

  • Preservation rhinoplasty lowers a hump by removing a strip of septum beneath the bridge and letting the intact bridge settle down, rather than cutting the hump off the top. A 2025 meta-analysis of four randomized trials (419 patients) found modestly better breathing and appearance scores with preservation than with conventional structural hump reduction [16], but a broader systematic review noted that most preservation studies are low-level evidence and few compare techniques directly [17]. It suits some noses (a smooth hump on a straight nose) better than others.

Dorsal hump

Link to 90 second YouTube animation demonstrating the concept of improving a “hump” shape of the nose.

A dorsal hump is a convexity of the bridge made of bone above and cartilage below. Conventional reduction shaves or rasps the bone and trims the cartilage, which opens a gap at the top of the nose; osteotomies (controlled cuts in the nasal bones) then bring the bones together to close it. Because removing the hump also removes the "roof" that supports the middle third, the upper lateral cartilages can fall inward, narrowing the internal nasal valve and producing an inverted-V shadow. Spreader grafts (strips of septal cartilage placed along the septum) or spreader flaps (the patient's own upper lateral cartilages folded inward) are used to prevent this. A meta-analysis of 52 studies found that breathing scores improved by a pooled 24 points on the 100-point NOSE scale after hump reduction with these techniques, with no difference between grafts and flaps [18]. Preservation rhinoplasty, described above, is an alternative for selected humps.

Pinched nose and nasal valve collapse

Link to a clear two minute Youtube animation of the surgical concepts in correcting a “pinched” nose. This procedure can be done to help breathing, appearance, or both.

A pinched nose looks narrow or "collapsed" at the sides, either along the middle third or just above the nostrils, and often has a matching breathing problem: the side wall is weak and is drawn inward when the person breathes in. This is called nasal valve collapse (or nasal valve compromise). It may be present from birth, follow injury, appear with aging, or follow earlier rhinoplasty that removed too much cartilage. An AAO-HNS consensus statement concluded that nasal valve compromise is best diagnosed by history and examination, that steroid sprays do not treat it in the absence of rhinitis, and that surgery is the primary treatment [19]. Surgery adds support with cartilage grafts: spreader grafts for the internal valve, and alar batten grafts or lateral crural strut grafts for the side wall. A 2025 systematic review of 15 studies (1,052 patients) found NOSE improvements ranging from about 16 to 66 points with lateral crural strut grafts and 26 to 69 points with alar batten grafts; lateral crural strut grafts also had documented cosmetic benefit [20].

Large or bulbous nasal tip

Short YouTube video animation demonstrating some techniques used to reduce the size of a large nasal tip.

A tip can look large because the lower lateral cartilages are wide, convex, or widely separated, because the tip projects too far from the face, or because the skin is thick. Cartilage can be refined by trimming the upper (cephalic) edge of the lower lateral cartilages and by sutures that narrow and shape the domes. Over-resection of cartilage is a recognized cause of later tip pinching, collapse, and breathing problems, so modern technique preserves a strong strip of cartilage and favors reshaping over removal; skin thickness and cartilage strength guide how much refinement is possible [21]. Thick skin limits definition and takes longer to settle [2].

Crooked or deviated nose

A crooked nose may bend in a C-shape, an S-shape, or tilt to one side, and the septum is usually deviated as well. Injury is not the usual cause. In 76 primary rhinoplasty patients, only 9% reported prior nasal trauma, while 68% had deviated nasal bones and 70% had midface asymmetry; the nasal bones usually leaned toward the less developed side of the face [22]. Correction typically combines straightening the septum, osteotomies to reposition the bones, and grafts to support the middle third. Because the face itself is often asymmetric, the goal is a nose that looks straight in its face, not a perfectly symmetric one. In a study of 102 septorhinoplasty patients, those with deviated noses gained more in breathing-related quality of life at 12 months than those without deviation [23].

Wide nose

Width can come from the bony base (wide nasal bones), the tip, or the nostrils. Wide nasal bones are narrowed with osteotomies; a broad tip is addressed with the tip techniques above; flaring or wide nostrils can be reduced by removing small wedges of skin at the nostril base (alar base reduction), which leaves a fine scar in the crease where the nostril meets the cheek. Narrowing must be balanced against breathing, which is one reason the AAO-HNS guideline calls for an airway evaluation before any rhinoplasty [1].

Drooping tip

A drooping (ptotic) tip points downward, often more so when smiling, and may make the nose look long or hooked. It can be present at a young age or develop with aging as the tip support weakens. Correction involves straightening the caudal septum and securing the tip in a higher position with sutures, a columellar strut, or a septal extension graft [24]. In one comparative study, septal extension grafts maintained tip projection better than columellar struts at 1 year [25].

COST OF RHINOPLASTY

The fee for rhinoplasty is quoted at consultation, after examination, because it depends on what the operation has to accomplish. For national context, the 2017 AAO-HNS guideline noted that the average rhinoplasty procedure in the United States typically exceeded $4,000, and that complications or revision add further cost [1]. The main factors that drive cost are:

  • Complexity and operating time. A small hump reduction is a shorter operation than a crooked nose that needs septal reconstruction, osteotomies, and several grafts.

  • Facility and anesthesia. Rhinoplasty is usually done under general anesthesia as an outpatient, and these fees are separate from the surgeon's fee.

  • Graft material. Most primary rhinoplasties use the patient's own septal cartilage. Revision cases more often need cartilage from the ear or rib, which adds time and a second surgical site [26].

  • Combined procedures. Chin augmentation, turbinate reduction, or sinus surgery at the same time add cost but avoid a second anesthetic and recovery.

  • Revision surgery. Revision rhinoplasty is more complex than a first operation and is priced accordingly.

Insurance

Health insurance does not pay for changes made only to improve appearance. Insurance may cover the functional parts of an operation, such as septoplasty, turbinate reduction, or nasal valve repair, when there is documented nasal obstruction that has not responded to medical treatment. When a patient has both goals, the cosmetic and functional portions are usually separated, and the patient pays the cosmetic portion directly. In a national claims database of 1,491 insured primary rhinoplasties in 2021, the patient's out-of-pocket share varied by plan type, averaging $234 with HMO plans and $936 with high-deductible plans [27]. Coverage rules vary by insurer, and preauthorization is commonly required.

Revision rates

The possibility of a second operation is part of the true cost. A review of 117 rhinoplasty studies found a revision rate of 5.3% after primary surgery, and dissatisfaction in 5.0% [28]. A systematic review of adverse events reported revision rates from 0 to 10.9% across studies, infection up to 4%, septal perforation up to 2.6%, and nasal obstruction requiring revision up to 3% [29]. Revision becomes more likely with each operation: in one specialized center, a further revision was needed after 10.5% of primary rhinoplasties and after 23.9% of revision rhinoplasties [26]. Because results are best judged at 12 months or later [1], revision is generally not considered until swelling has settled.

FUNCTIONAL VS. COSMETIC RHINOPLASTY

Cosmetic rhinoplasty changes how the nose looks. Functional surgery changes how the nose works, most often to relieve nasal obstruction, the sensation of not getting enough air through the nose. The two overlap: many noses have both a cosmetic concern and a breathing problem, and the same structures (septum, nasal valves, side walls) determine both. Surgery that addresses both at once is called functional septorhinoplasty. Treatment options are summarized on the nasal breathing treatments and nose shape treatments pages, and the conditions themselves on nose shape conditions.

Common causes of nasal obstruction

  • Deviated septum. The septum, the wall of cartilage and bone dividing the two sides of the nose, bends into one or both airways. Septoplasty straightens it through incisions inside the nose. An AAO-HNS consensus statement defines septoplasty as surgery to correct a deviated septum to improve nasal function, form, or both, and addresses diagnosis, medical treatment before surgery, and expected outcomes [30]. More detail is on the septoplasty page.

  • Enlarged inferior turbinates. These lining structures on the side walls swell with allergy and irritation and are often reduced at the same time as septoplasty [30].

  • Nasal valve collapse. Weak side walls or a narrow middle third, as described above under the pinched nose. Surgery that adds structural support to the valve is the primary treatment [19].

Measuring the problem: the NOSE scale

The Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scale is a validated five-question survey covering congestion, blockage, trouble breathing through the nose, trouble sleeping, and air hunger with exercise, scored from 0 to 100. A score of 30 best separates people with and without obstruction; scores of 5 to 25 are classed as mild, 30 to 50 moderate, 55 to 75 severe, and 80 to 100 extreme [31]. In a pooled analysis, people with obstruction averaged about 65 before surgery and about 23 after, close to the 15 seen in people without symptoms [32]. The NOSE scale is used both to document need for surgery and to measure results.

Evidence for septoplasty

Septoplasty is one of the most common operations in otolaryngology, yet until recently it had not been tested against non-surgical care in a randomized trial. Two large trials now provide that evidence:

  • The Dutch trial (van Egmond et al., Lancet 2019). 203 adults with nasal obstruction and a deviated septum at 18 hospitals were randomized to septoplasty, with or without turbinate surgery, or to non-surgical management. At 12 months, health-related quality of life was significantly better after surgery (Glasgow Health Status Inventory 72.2 vs 63.9), and the benefit was sustained to 24 months. Complications included one septal abscess and two septal perforations among the surgical patients [33]. An economic analysis of the same trial found that the cost per quality-adjusted life year gained fell substantially between 12 and 24 months as the benefit persisted [34].

  • The UK NAIROS trial (Carrie et al., BMJ 2023). 378 adults with at least moderate obstruction (NOSE above 30) and septal deviation were randomized to septoplasty or six months of nasal steroid and saline sprays. At 6 months the sinonasal symptom score (SNOT-22) was 20 points better after septoplasty, well beyond the 9-point minimal important difference, and airflow measures also improved more. Patients with more severe baseline symptoms gained the most. Seven patients (4%) were readmitted for bleeding and 12% needed antibiotics for infection [35].

  • Earlier observational data. In the multicenter NOSE study of 59 patients, mean NOSE scores fell from 67.5 to 23.1 three months after septoplasty and stayed there at 6 months, with high satisfaction and less medication use [36].

Evidence for functional rhinoplasty and nasal valve repair

When obstruction comes from the nasal valves or side walls, the operation is a functional rhinoplasty, which reshapes and supports the external nose. A meta-analysis of 16 studies found that NOSE scores fell by 43 to 50 points (out of 100) over the first year after functional rhinoplasty; the authors noted that the studies were observational and heterogeneous [37]. Less invasive office options exist for selected patients with side wall collapse. An absorbable implant placed to stiffen the side wall improved obstruction-related quality of life compared with sham treatment in a meta-analysis of five studies (396 patients) [38], and temperature-controlled radiofrequency treatment of the internal valve showed improvements comparable to those reported for functional rhinoplasty in a separate meta-analysis, although that comparison was indirect, across different studies [39]. These options do not change the shape of the nose.

When cosmetic and functional goals are combined

Combining the two in one operation is common and sensible: the incisions, anesthesia, and recovery are shared, and the surgeon can protect or improve the airway while changing the shape. Reducing a hump or narrowing a nose without supporting the valves can create a breathing problem, which is why the AAO-HNS guideline recommends evaluating the airway before every rhinoplasty and counseling patients on how surgery may affect breathing [1]. For insurance purposes the functional and cosmetic components are documented and billed separately, as described in the cost section.

Summary

  • Good candidates have specific, realistic goals, a nose that has finished growing (about 16 in girls and 17 in boys), and no significant body dysmorphic disorder symptoms, which are common in people seeking rhinoplasty and predict lower satisfaction.

  • Pooled satisfaction scores roughly double after rhinoplasty, but swelling takes up to a year to resolve, and about 5% of primary rhinoplasties are revised.

  • The chin and nose are judged together in profile; a weak chin can make a normal nose look large.

  • Each nasal feature (hump, pinched sides, large or drooping tip, deviation, width) has its own techniques, and many require cartilage grafts to protect breathing. Open and closed approaches give similar results.

  • Randomized trials show that septoplasty improves quality of life more than medical treatment for adults with a deviated septum and moderate or worse obstruction, and functional rhinoplasty reduces NOSE scores by about 45 points on average.

  • Cosmetic changes are paid for by the patient; functional components may be covered by insurance when obstruction is documented.

Last reviewed: October 4, 2026

References

  1. Ishii LE, Tollefson TT, Basura GJ, et al. Clinical Practice Guideline: Improving Nasal Form and Function after Rhinoplasty. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017;156(2_suppl):S1-S30. doi:10.1177/0194599816683153 PubMed 28145823

  2. Pavri S, Zhu VZ, Steinbacher DM. Postoperative Edema Resolution following Rhinoplasty: A Three-Dimensional Morphometric Assessment. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;138(6):973e-979e. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000002760 PubMed 27879585

  3. Nabavizadeh SS, Naseri R, Sadeghi E, et al. Prevalence of body dysmorphic disorder in rhinoplasty candidates: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Health Sci Rep. 2023;6(8):e1495. doi:10.1002/hsr2.1495 PubMed 37599660

  4. Picavet VA, Prokopakis EP, Gabriëls L, et al. High prevalence of body dysmorphic disorder symptoms in patients seeking rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128(2):509-517. doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e31821b631f PubMed 21788842

  5. Picavet VA, Gabriëls L, Grietens J, et al. Preoperative symptoms of body dysmorphic disorder determine postoperative satisfaction and quality of life in aesthetic rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;131(4):861-868. doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182818f02 PubMed 23249985

  6. Thomson DR, Thomson NEV, Southwick G. Screening for Body Dysmorphic Disorder in Plastic Surgery Patients. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2024;48(14):2738-2743. doi:10.1007/s00266-024-03959-6 PubMed 38538768

  7. van der Heijden P, Korsten-Meijer AG, van der Laan BF, et al. Nasal growth and maturation age in adolescents: a systematic review. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008;134(12):1288-93. doi:10.1001/archoto.2008.501 PubMed 19075124

  8. Rot P, Krzywdzińska S, Grab P, et al. The Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) Questionnaire in Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Clin Med. 2024;13(16). doi:10.3390/jcm13164642 PubMed 39200785

  9. Yang F, Liu Y, Xiao H, et al. Evaluation of Preoperative and Postoperative Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life in Patients Undergoing Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;141(3):603-611. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000004102 PubMed 29135891

  10. Reategui A, Jazayeri H, Mier A, et al. Profileplasty: Comprehensive Facial Profile Management Algorithm Based on 426 Patients. J Craniofac Surg. 2025;36(2):523-525. doi:10.1097/SCS.0000000000010999 PubMed 39715529

  11. Sykes JM, Suárez GA. Chin Advancement, Augmentation, and Reduction as Adjuncts to Rhinoplasty. Clin Plast Surg. 2016;43(1):295-306. doi:10.1016/j.cps.2015.09.021 PubMed 26616715

  12. Rezaei N, Abbasi H, Khaksar A, et al. Effects of deviations in the nose and chin prominence on facial attractiveness. J Orthod. 2021;48(2):135-143. doi:10.1177/1465312520981985 PubMed 33546571

  13. Bertossi D, Albanese M, Turra M, et al. Combined rhinoplasty and genioplasty: long-term follow-up. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2013;15(3):192-7. doi:10.1001/jamafacial.2013.759 PubMed 23493992

  14. Abi Zeid Daou C, Jalkh RM, Semaan ZM, et al. Outcomes of Open Versus Closed Rhinoplasty, a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2025;13(8):e7047. doi:10.1097/GOX.0000000000007047 PubMed 40771258

  15. Gökçe Kütük S, Arıkan OK. Evaluation of the effects of open and closed rhinoplasty on the psychosocial stress level and quality of life of rhinoplasty patients. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2019;72(8):1347-1354. doi:10.1016/j.bjps.2019.03.020 PubMed 31078414

  16. Shim SR, Kim JY, Lee SM, et al. Preservation Rhinoplasty Versus Structural Rhinoplasty in Dorsal Hump Reduction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med. 2025;27(6):564-571. doi:10.1089/fpsam.2024.0382 PubMed 40227917

  17. DeSisto NG, Okland TS, Patel PN, et al. State of the Evidence for Preservation Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review. Facial Plast Surg. 2023;39(4):333-361. doi:10.1055/s-0043-1768654 PubMed 37160159

  18. Buba CM, Patel PN, Saltychev M, et al. The Safety and Efficacy of Spreader Grafts and Autospreaders in Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2022;46(4):1741-1759. doi:10.1007/s00266-021-02735-0 PubMed 35031825

  19. Rhee JS, Weaver EM, Park SS, et al. Clinical consensus statement: Diagnosis and management of nasal valve compromise. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010;143(1):48-59. doi:10.1016/j.otohns.2010.04.019 PubMed 20620619

  20. Jackson JM, DeSisto NG, Sharma RK, et al. Alar Battens Grafts Versus Lateral Crural Strut Grafts: A Systematic Review of Postoperative Outcomes. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2025;173(6):1328-1336. doi:10.1002/ohn.70010 PubMed 40922497

  21. Nagarkar P, Stark RY, Pezeshk RA, et al. Role of the Cephalic Trim in Modern Rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;137(1):89-96. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000001860 PubMed 26710011

  22. Scott BL, Pearlman S. Nasal Deviation and Facial Asymmetry in Patients Undergoing Rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J. 2024;44(11):1149-1153. doi:10.1093/asj/sjae125 PubMed 38833613

  23. Bulut OC, Wallner F, Hohenberger R, et al. Quality of life after primary septorhinoplasty in deviated- and non-deviated nose measured with ROE, FROI-17 and SF-36. Rhinology. 2017;55(1):75-80. doi:10.4193/Rhin16.243 PubMed 28025985

  24. Giacomini PG, Rubino S, Mocella S, et al. Approach to the correction of drooping tip: common problems and solutions. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2017;37(4):295-302. doi:10.14639/0392-100X-911 PubMed 28530259

  25. Vaghardoost R, Zahedi A, Abbaszadeh A. Long-Term Durability of Tip Projection and Rotation with Strut Columella and Septal Extension Graft in Rhinoplasty: A 6-Month and 1-Year Follow-Up. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2026;50(10):3660-3667. doi:10.1007/s00266-026-05615-7 PubMed 41629470

  26. Hacker S, Pollock J, Gubisch W, et al. Differences between Primary and Revision Rhinoplasty: Indications, Techniques, Grafts, and Outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021;148(3):532-541. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000008216 PubMed 34270514

  27. Seyidova N, Wang A, Oleru O, et al. Nationwide Analysis of Cost and Insurance Type Coverage for Primary Rhinoplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2025;49(17):4857-4863. doi:10.1007/s00266-025-04878-w PubMed 40259065

  28. Heilbronn C, Cragun D, Wong BJF. Complications in Rhinoplasty: A Literature Review and Comparison with a Survey of Consent Forms. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med. 2020;22(1):50-56. doi:10.1089/fpsam.2019.29007.won PubMed 32053419

  29. Sharif-Askary B, Carlson AR, Van Noord MG, et al. Incidence of Postoperative Adverse Events after Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2020;145(3):669-684. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000006561 PubMed 32097305

  30. Han JK, Stringer SP, Rosenfeld RM, et al. Clinical Consensus Statement: Septoplasty with or without Inferior Turbinate Reduction. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015;153(5):708-20. doi:10.1177/0194599815606435 PubMed 26527752

  31. Lipan MJ, Most SP. Development of a severity classification system for subjective nasal obstruction. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2013;15(5):358-61. doi:10.1001/jamafacial.2013.344 PubMed 23846399

  32. Rhee JS, Sullivan CD, Frank DO, et al. A systematic review of patient-reported nasal obstruction scores: defining normative and symptomatic ranges in surgical patients. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2014;16(3):219-25; quiz 232. doi:10.1001/jamafacial.2013.2473 PubMed 24604253

  33. van Egmond MMHT, Rovers MM, Hannink G, et al. Septoplasty with or without concurrent turbinate surgery versus non-surgical management for nasal obstruction in adults with a deviated septum: a pragmatic, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2019;394(10195):314-321. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30354-X PubMed 31227374

  34. van Egmond MMHT, Grutters JPC, Hannink G, et al. Septoplasty versus non-surgical management for nasal obstruction in adults with a deviated septum: economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial. BMC Med. 2020;18(1):101. doi:10.1186/s12916-020-01562-5 PubMed 32354362

  35. Carrie S, O'Hara J, Fouweather T, et al. Clinical effectiveness of septoplasty versus medical management for nasal airways obstruction: multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2023;383:e075445. doi:10.1136/bmj-2023-075445 PubMed 37852641

  36. Stewart MG, Smith TL, Weaver EM, et al. Outcomes after nasal septoplasty: results from the Nasal Obstruction Septoplasty Effectiveness (NOSE) study. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;130(3):283-90. doi:10.1016/j.otohns.2003.12.004 PubMed 15054368

  37. Floyd EM, Ho S, Patel P, et al. Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Studies Evaluating Functional Rhinoplasty Outcomes with the NOSE Score. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017;156(5):809-815. doi:10.1177/0194599817691272 PubMed 28168892

  38. Kim DH, Lee HH, Kim SH, et al. Effectiveness of using a bioabsorbable implant (Latera) to treat nasal valve collapse in patients with nasal obstruction: systemic review and meta-analysis. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2020;10(6):719-725. doi:10.1002/alr.22543 PubMed 32282129

  39. Han JK, Perkins J, Lerner D, et al. Comparison of nasal valve dysfunction treatment outcomes for temperature-controlled radiofrequency and functional rhinoplasty surgery: a systematic review and meta-analyses. Rhinology. 2024;62(3):258-270. doi:10.4193/Rhin23.261 PubMed 38217624

Learning Center Main Index:

 

This page