Allogenous cartilage graft versus autogenous cartilage graft in augmentation rhinoplasty: A decade of clinical experience

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorTosun, Z.
dc.contributor.authorKarabekmez, F. E.
dc.contributor.authorKeskin, M.
dc.contributor.authorDuymaz, A.
dc.contributor.authorSavaci, N.
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-26T17:26:22Z
dc.date.available2020-03-26T17:26:22Z
dc.date.issued2008
dc.departmentSelçuk Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractCartilage grafts have great value in augmentation rhinoplasty. For most surgeons, an autogenous cartilage graft is the first choice in rhinoplasty because of its resistance to infection and resorption. On the other hand, an allogenous cartilage graft might be preferred over an autogenous graft to avoid additional morbidity and lengthened operating time. Allogenous cartilage grafts not only have the advantage of averting donor site morbidity but also are resistant to infection, resembling autogenous cartilage grafts. The authors present their experience with 41 patients who underwent augmentation rhinoplasty using 22 autogenous and 19 allogenous cartilage grafts between June 1994 and August 2004. For evaluation of adequate augmentation rates, photographic analyses were performed on preoperative, early postoperative, and late postoperative photographs from all the patients. To assess patient satisfaction, the Facial Appearance Sorting Test (FAST) was applied preoperatively and late postoperatively in both groups. These results were compared, and it was concluded that in terms of resorption, there was no difference in the early and late postoperative follow-up data between allogenous and autogenous cartilage grafts. Evaluation of the preoperative and early postoperative photographic outcomes showed statistically significant differences with respect to adequate augmentation rates between the two groups. The FAST scores showed statistically significant differences between preoperative and late postoperative outcomes. There were no infections in the two groups of patients.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00266-007-9044-3en_US
dc.identifier.endpage260en_US
dc.identifier.issn0364-216Xen_US
dc.identifier.issn1432-5241en_US
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.pmid17968616en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1en_US
dc.identifier.startpage252en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00266-007-9044-3
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12395/22189
dc.identifier.volume32en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000253680200010en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ3en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherSPRINGERen_US
dc.relation.ispartofAESTHETIC PLASTIC SURGERYen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.selcuk20240510_oaigen_US
dc.subjectallogenous cartilage graften_US
dc.subjectaugmentation rhinoplastyen_US
dc.titleAllogenous cartilage graft versus autogenous cartilage graft in augmentation rhinoplasty: A decade of clinical experienceen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu