Journal archive · Rib, ear and septal grafts · Complications and management · Anatomy and nasal analysis · 2026
Fresh Frozen vs Autologous Costal Cartilage in Rhinoplasty: A Meta-Analysis of Complication Rates
Bohler F, Dimock E, Liao C, Samaha Y, Datta S, Mattos D, Reish RG.
In the archive as a landmark paper: the core sweep runs 2011–2026, and this one is here because the history of rhinoplasty rests on it · cited on costal cartilage harvest.
Abstract
Background: Fresh frozen costal cartilage (FFCC) has emerged as a promising alternative to autologous costal cartilage (ACC) in structural rhinoplasty, offering advantages such as elimination of donor site morbidity and reduced operative time. However, concerns remain regarding its complication profile compared with ACC.
Objectives: This meta-analysis compares postoperative complication rates between FFCC and ACC in rhinoplasty, focusing on infection, warping, resorption, and revision surgery.
Methods: A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for studies published between January 1990 and March 2025. Eligible studies reported outcomes of rhinoplasty using FFCC or ACC in cohorts of ≥5 patients. Data were extracted on complication rates, patient demographics, follow-up duration, and study characteristics. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. Pooled complication rates and 95% CIs were calculated. Differences between graft types were assessed using unpaired 2-proportion z-tests.
Results: Twenty-seven studies met inclusion criteria, encompassing 2137 patients in the ACC group and 766 in the FFCC group. The weighted mean follow-up was 18.4 months for ACC and 23.0 months for FFCC. Fresh frozen costal cartilage was associated with significantly lower rates of warping (1.2% vs 3.9%; P = .00038) and revision surgery (1.3% vs 3.4%; P = .0029). Infection (1.7% vs 2.3%; P = .34) and resorption rates (1.2% vs 1.9%; P = .25) were not significantly different between groups.
Conclusions: Fresh frozen costal cartilage demonstrates significantly lower rates of warping and revision surgery compared with ACC, with no increase in infection or resorption. Despite limitations related to study design and follow-up duration, these findings support FFCC as a safe and effective alternative to autologous grafts in rhinoplasty. Further prospective, controlled studies are needed to confirm these results and evaluate long-term outcomes.
Level Of Evidence 3 Risk: For image description, please refer to the figure legend and surrounding text.
Abstract as indexed by PubMed; the article is open access (PubMed Central).
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.
Anatomy and nasal analysis
Before any technique is chosen, the nose has to be read: the bone measured, the cartilage counted, the skin assessed, and the result the patient wants agreed on a photograph that is not yet true.
Related papers
Same topic, 2026.
- ASJ Adverse Outcomes and Complications of Autologous Versus Homologous Costal Cartilage Grafts in Septorhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysisJullamusi W, Kowitwibool K, Mungmee A et al.2026PMID 42374829Abstract
- ASJ Asian Rhinoplasty Using Exclusively Auricular Cartilage Through a Closed ApproachGu Q, Fu Z, Li J et al.2026PMID 41411306Summary
- ASJ Dorsal Width and Functional Outcomes with use of Autospreader Flaps in Cosmetic RhinoplastyJabbour N, Pelligrini W, Shehan J et al.2026PMID 42415377Summary
- ASJ Efficacy of Combined Septal Extension and Derotation Grafts in Asian Rhinoplasty: A Quantitative Analysis of Tip Projection and StabilityHuang CJ, Tsai TY, Yen CI et al.2026PMID 41990353Summary
- ASJ Establishing Normative Data on Satisfaction with Nasal Appearance: a Dutch Population-Based Study Using Aesthetic Rhinoplasty Outcome InstrumentsKasapov M, Afonso PM, Datema FR et al.2026PMID 42670247Summary
- ASJ Piezoelectric Versus Conventional Rhinoplasty: A GRADE-Assessed Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled TrialsArmanfar S, Ardakani MR, Vahidiataabadi M2026PMID 42013314Summary
- ASJ Postoperative Differences in Dorsal Aesthetic Lines in Patients Undergoing Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty and Conventional Hump ResectionXu L, Huang H, Kandathil CK et al.2026PMID 41369038Summary
- ASJ Preoperative Serotonin Antidepressants Are Associated With Increased Postoperative Complications Following Rhinoplasty: A Propensity Score-Matched AnalysisZontag N, Skorochod R, Wolf Y2026PMID 41672725Summary