Journal archive · Rib, ear and septal grafts · Complications and management · 2022
Predicting Risk of Infection After Rhinoplasty with Autogenous Costal Cartilage: A Cohort Study
Wang X, Dong W, Wang H, You J, Zheng R, Xu Y, Fan F.
What this paper says
Using 672 rib cartilage rhinoplasty patients, the authors built a ten factor prediction tool for infection risk that scored 0.987 for discrimination and 0.935 in a separate validation group of 118 patients.
Overview
The study developed and validated a nomogram, a scoring chart predicting risk, for infection after rib cartilage rhinoplasty. The primary group was 672 patients assessed between October 2018 and December 2020. A separate validation group of 118 consecutive patients from January to June 2021 tested it.
Sections of note
- Cohort study; 672 patients in the development group and 118 in the validation group; level of evidence IV.
- Twenty one candidate features were reduced to 10 predictors using LASSO regression.
- The ten factors were age, number of previous nose operations, length of hospital stay, operation time, history of nasal trauma, animal contact after surgery, smoking, drinking and spicy food within one month after surgery, and history of nasal infection.
- The model showed a C-index of 0.987, 95 percent confidence interval 0.978 to 0.996, with internal validation of 0.967.
- Calibration was good and the area under the curve was 0.987.
- In the validation group the C-index was 0.935, 95 percent confidence interval 0.910 to 0.960.
- Decision curve analysis indicated the tool was clinically helpful.
- The authors state this is the first such tool for rib cartilage rhinoplasty.
What it means for a patient
- Several of the strongest predictors are behaviours in the month after surgery, including smoking, alcohol, spicy food and animal contact.
- Previous nasal operations and previous nasal infection also raised predicted risk.
- A discrimination score of 0.987 is unusually high for a clinical prediction model, which warrants caution about overfitting.
- Both groups came from the same centre, so external validation elsewhere has not been done.
Why this paper matters
Infection after rib grafting can destroy the graft and require reconstruction, and no established way of identifying high risk patients existed. This study builds and internally validates one. Whether it performs as well in other populations remains untested.
Terms
- Nomogram: a chart converting several patient factors into a predicted risk.
- Autogenous costal cartilage: rib cartilage taken from the patient's own body.
- LASSO regression: a statistical method that selects the most informative variables.
- C-index: a measure of how well a model separates those who develop an outcome from those who do not.
- Calibration: how closely predicted risks match observed rates.
- Decision curve analysis: a method assessing whether using a model improves clinical decisions.
Summary written by rhinoplasty.cc from the abstract, 2026-09-09; not medical advice. The authors' own abstract follows. All 1,262 summaries.
From the abstract
“The study was aimed to develop and validate a nomogram to predict risk of postoperative infection after costal cartilage-based rhinoplasty METHODS: The primary cohort of this study consisted of 672 patients who were appraised between October 2018 and December 2020. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator…”
Excerpt; the full abstract is on PubMed.
Citation
Start here
What the rhinoplasty literature says on this paper's topics, cited line by line to PubMed.
Rib, ear and septal grafts
Modern rhinoplasty builds rather than removes, so the operation runs on cartilage: the septum first, then the ear, then the rib, and when none of those will do, a piece of donated rib from a tissue bank.
Complications and management
Serious complications after rhinoplasty are rare: infection runs under 1% in the two largest single-surgeon series, pooled rib harvests record no pneumothorax, and the bleeding series record no thromboembolism.
Related papers
Same topic, 2022.
- ASJ Spreader Graft vs Spreader Flap in Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Aesthetic and Functional OutcomesKeyhan SO, Fallahi HR, Cheshmi B et al.2022PMID 34864854Summary
- APS Comparison of Free Diced and Multiple Toothpick-Shaped Costal Cartilage Injection Techniques for Augmentation RhinoplastyGu T, Li X, Yang X et al.2022PMID 34595596Summary
- APS Comparison of the Effect of Spreader and T-Splay Graft in Internal Nasal Valve ManagementKapı E, Kopal C, Seyhan T et al.2022PMID 35201376Full text
- APS Complications Associated with Rhinoplasty: An Umbrella Review of Meta-analysesWu B, Chen S, Sun K et al.2022PMID 34590168Summary
- APS Crushed Septal Cartilage-Covered Diced Cartilage Glue (CCDG) Graft: A Hybrid Technique of Crushed Septal CartilageLee YH, Choi YS, Bae CH et al.2022PMID 34799765Abstract
- APS Diced Cartilage Techniques in RhinoplastyDong W, Han R, Fan F2022PMID 34731262Summary
- APS 2022PMID 35412066
- APS Invited Response on: 'Letter on Bilateral Fan-Shaped Septal Extension Struts in East Asian Augmentation Rhinoplasty'Wang H, Wu L, Xu Y et al.2022PMID 34231023