rhinoplasty.cc
Menu

Journal archive · by topic

Nasal tip

Tip surgery is now a support problem rather than a sculpting problem: the septal extension graft holds projection and rotation where the columellar strut loses them (0.2% against 4.7% projection loss at one year), and the current series repair, reposition and reinforce the lower lateral cartilages instead of excising them. Large series report satisfaction of 85–90% with revision rates between 1.7% and 13%, but almost all of them are single-surgeon and retrospective, and only 27.3% of published tip-graft studies report what the patient thought.

Where these 200 papers were published

  • 60Plastic and Reconstructive SurgeryPlast Reconstr Surg
  • 57Aesthetic Plastic SurgeryAesthetic Plast Surg
  • 25Aesthetic Surgery JournalAesthet Surg J
  • 24Facial Plastic SurgeryFacial Plast Surg
  • 11JAMA Facial Plastic SurgeryJAMA Facial Plast Surg
  • 9Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global OpenPlast Reconstr Surg Glob Open
  • 8Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetic MedicineFacial Plast Surg Aesthet Med
  • 3Archives of Facial Plastic SurgeryArch Facial Plast Surg
  • 2Facial Plastic Surgery Clinics of North AmericaFacial Plast Surg Clin North Am
  • 1Clinics in Plastic SurgeryClin Plast Surg

89 further papers on this topic came in through the history rather than the archive query: GOLDMAN IB 1957, ANDERSON JR 1962, Janeke JB 1971, Tardy ME Jr 1973 and 85 more. They are counted on the landmark papers, not here.

What repeats

Six findings reported by independent groups in different countries. Each card carries the papers it rests on.

Septal extension graft 0.2% projection loss, columellar strut 4.7%

Two structures are used to hold the tip: a strut floating between the medial crura, and a graft fixed to the septum that the tip is then set onto. Measured at one year in 77 primary open rhinoplasties by one surgeon, the strut lost 4.7% of projection against 0.2% for the septal extension graft, and 4.9 degrees of rotation against 1.3. The strut carried a 5.1-fold risk of losing more than 4% of projection and a 2.8-fold risk of losing five degrees or more of rotation. A meta-analysis of eight studies (256 strut, 371 extension graft patients) reaches the same direction from pooled data: long-term nasolabial angle favoured the extension graft, and Goode's ratio improved after the extension graft but not after the strut. The strut is not useless. It is a smaller intervention with a smaller and predictable loss.

Rests on: Bellamy and Rohrich, 77 primaries at one year · Ozgenc et al., meta-analysis of eight studies.

Combined septal extension and derotation grafts revised at 6.5%, either alone 10.6–14.3%

In 324 Asian short-nose corrections by one surgeon over seven years, three constructions were compared over more than twelve months: derotation graft with columellar strut, septal extension graft alone, and the two combined. The combination held nasal length and tip projection most consistently and revised least, 6.5%, against 10.6% for the extension graft alone and 14.3% for the derotation graft with a strut. A separate 729-patient comparison of the two grafts found projection gains equal but the failure modes different: the extension graft produced more tip-columella deviation (5.23% against 1.41%) and the derotation graft more tip drooping (8.45% against 4.53%) and more supratip deformity (2.82% against 0%). Both hold; they fail in opposite directions.

Rests on: Huang et al., 324 short-nose corrections · Namgoong et al., 729 tip-plasties.

The lateral crus is repositioned and reinforced, not excised

Every recent series that touches the lateral crus argues against removing it. An algorithm built on preservation and repositioning in 50 patients reported 90% aesthetic and functional improvement with 4% revision for minor asymmetry. A lateral crural strut graft used for post-implant tip deformities in 37 Asian secondary cases moved the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation score from 30.41 to 75.90. Lateral crural repositioning with reconstruction in 42 revisions improved obstruction and cosmesis scores at both three and eleven months and improved lateral wall insufficiency at zone 1. The extended alar contour graft combines the lateral crural strut with the rim graft for the same purpose: hold the ala out and stop the tip standing in isolation.

Rests on: Tanvar and Basu, classification and algorithm in 50 patients · Kook et al., lateral crural strut in 37 secondary cases · Abdelhamid et al., repositioning in 42 revisions · Cochran and Sieber, extended alar contour graft.

Supratip fullness is a soft-tissue problem as much as a cartilage one

Three groups measured what happens to the supratip when the ligaments over it are handled differently, and all three found the soft tissue decisive. Repairing the Pitanguy ligament to the caudal septum in 120 open cases gave a significantly deeper supratip break at twelve months than either leaving it alone or excising it. An interalar ligament flap in 147 primary open cases lowered tip edema and supratip fullness and raised supratip definition at two, six and twelve months. In closed low-septal-resection preservation, transecting Pitanguy's midline ligament prevented supratip depression entirely (0 of 20 against 4 of 16) without causing pollybeak. Where fullness is already established, a graded classification, the Supratip Fullness Rating Scale, took 53 Asian corrections from 2.34 to 0.23.

Rests on: Şirinoğlu et al., Pitanguy repair in 120 patients · Marianetti et al., interalar ligament flap in 147 · Erdal and Genç, ligament transection in preservation · Wang et al., pollybeak classification.

Many tip grafts work; the evidence behind them is observational

A systematic review of a decade of tip grafting found 44 studies, 38 of them observational and six randomised, averaging 6.5 of 9 on the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and 2.5 of 5 on Jadad. Autologous, homologous and alloplastic grafts all produced satisfactory results, 86.4% of studies reported anthropometric measurements and only 27.3% reported anything the patient said. The individual series on file fit that description: 193 mastoid fascia camouflage cases with 3.1% revision, 45 X-shaped rib grafts holding position, 37 Y-shaped auricular struts raising the nasolabial angle, 66 bilateral conchal and septal frameworks graded excellent or good in 93.9%. The direction is consistent; the comparisons that would rank them do not exist.

Rests on: Skochdopole et al., 44 studies appraised · Tugertimur et al., mastoid fascia in 193 cases · Wu et al., X-shaped rib graft in 45 patients · Martino et al., Y-columellar strut in 37 · Wang et al., conchal and septal framework in 66.

The tip is planned against the upper lip, not only the nose

In 139 consecutive primary patients, 61% had inadequate incisor show and 5% excessive gum show before any operation, the lip position that tip surgery then moves. Tip overprojection predicted a long nose (odds ratio 3.03) and a hanging columella did too (2.97), while underprojection predicted a short nose (odds ratio 35). No nasal measurement predicted lip position, so it has to be examined separately. The published algorithm selects the tip construction from that examination: a short columella with poor incisor show gets extended spreader grafts and a strut tapered posteriorly; excessive gum show gets an untapered or wider strut fixed to the septum to push the lip down.

Rests on: Swanson et al., 139 primary patients · Guyuron et al., incisor-show algorithm.

By problem

What the 40 papers on file report for each presenting problem, and how far the follow-up runs.

The short or under-projected tip

The most crowded problem in this literature. The septal extension graft is the base construction; combining it with a derotation graft revised least in 324 Asian cases (6.5%), and every one of 30 primary rib-graft cases in a 638-case American practice also received an extension graft. Where rib is used, warping is the risk, and a circumferential split producing an X-shaped graft held the nasion-pronasale angle stable in 45 patients. Auricular cartilage covers the smaller gain: a Y-shaped strut from the antihelix raised the nasolabial angle in 37 patients, and bilateral conchal cartilage combined with septal cartilage produced excellent or good results in 93.9% of 66. A single-unit graft merging the extension graft and strut in 32 primaries needed no revisions at 13.4 months.

Key papers: Huang et al. · Novak et al., rib in 30 of 638 primaries · Wu et al., X-shaped tip graft · Martino et al., Y-columellar strut · Rosi-Schumacher and Sherris, combined graft in 32.

The overprojected tip

One large series covers it. Of 2,003 rhinoplasties in one American practice over eight years, 447 needed deprojection, done by resecting the medial crura, stealing from the lateral crura and adding a columellar strut. At a mean 22.4 months, 1.8% needed empiric antibiotics and 3.8% needed a revision operation. The closed-approach algorithm built on 19,643 Caucasian primaries treats the same problem by volume, projection and rotation assessment: 67% of that cohort needed tip-interrupting techniques, 88.7% declared full satisfaction and 12.3% needed a minor revision across a twenty-year follow-up.

Key papers: Datta et al., 447 deprojections · Scattolin et al., 19,643 closed primaries.

The bulbous tip and lateral crural deformity

Handled by repositioning and reinforcement rather than cephalic trim: a preservation-based algorithm in 50 patients (4% revision), lateral crural strut grafts in 37 Asian secondary cases, repositioning and reconstruction in 42 revisions, and the extended alar contour graft as a combined construction. For total reconstruction of a destroyed lower lateral cartilage, published two-dimensional templates from 40 cadaver cartilages give the shape to carve from a rib slice.

Key papers: Tanvar and Basu · Kook et al. · Abdelhamid et al. · Kiranantawat and Pakawatkul, cadaveric templates.

Supratip fullness and pollybeak

Prevention is ligament management. Repair the Pitanguy ligament in open structural cases, transect it in closed low-strip preservation, or raise an interalar ligament flap, and correction is graded first, then addressed by cause. The Supratip Fullness Rating Scale moved from 2.34 to 0.23 in 53 Asian corrections, with surgeon-rated appearance from 7.47 to 1.79 and 77.36% satisfaction on the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation.

Key papers: Şirinoğlu et al. · Erdal and Genç · Marianetti et al. · Wang et al..

The alar base and nostrils

Four techniques, four series, all from the basal view that photography made prominent. A two-step sequential alar base resection in 423 primary and secondary patients reported no technique-specific complication. An alar base lining graft in 42 patients prevented and corrected alar retraction with no extrusion or collapse at a year or more. Auricular composite grafts from the antihelix corrected the alar-nostril ring in 45 multiply operated patients (no graft failed, including in ten with previous skin necrosis), taking obstruction and cosmesis scores from 88 to 35. Alar base depression is filled either with fascia (52 patients, grayscale depression index 0.720 to 0.583) or with cartilage: a systematic review of six studies and 165 patients found diced cartilage more malleable and better long-term, mass cartilage easier to place with less resorption.

Key papers: Pozzi et al., sequential alar base resection in 423 · Pozzi et al., alar base lining graft · Sazgar et al., composite grafts in 45 · Zhao et al., fascia in 52 · Xiang et al., diced against mass cartilage · Rohrich et al., systematic alar base approach.

The columella and the incision

The incision itself changes the result. A prospective 52-patient comparison found a V-shaped columella-labial incision with V-Y closure gave greater projection gain and columellar height than the mid-columellar incision with no difference in scar; in 91 multiply operated noses the same incision produced no dehiscence or vascular event despite existing mid-columellar scars. Suture choice does not matter: a meta-analysis of six studies and 435 patients found no difference in scar between absorbable and non-absorbable. Where necrosis does occur, the published prevention is avoiding closure tension, advancing the columellar base anteriorly and using a Silastic healing chamber.

Key papers: Sazgar et al., prospective incision comparison · Sazgar et al., 91 compromised noses · Kenny et al., suture meta-analysis · Toriumi, columellar necrosis.

The tip without surgery

One series, one technique, six months of follow-up: a four-point hyaluronic acid injection in 107 patients at a mean of 0.12 mL, rated excellent on the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale in 90.65% at six months. That is a small volume producing a graded improvement over a short window, and it is the only non-surgical tip data on file.

Key paper: Betti et al., diamond injection technique.

The terms, defined

Every term the papers above use to mean something specific, in plain language.

  • Septal extension graft (SEG): a cartilage graft fixed to the caudal septum with the tip set onto it, so projection and rotation are held against healing forces. The construction with the least measured late loss. [36728586, 41990353]
  • Columellar strut graft (CSG): a cartilage batten placed between the medial crura. It floats rather than fixing to the septum, which is why it loses more projection and rotation over a year. [36728586, 40854551]
  • Anatomic columellar strut: a strut shaped and placed to follow the natural columellar contour rather than sit as a straight bar, described as an algorithmic alternative. [31675056]
  • Derotation graft (DRG): a graft that rotates the tip downward and lengthens a short nose. Compared with the extension graft it gives equal projection but more drooping and supratip fullness. [39965161, 41990353]
  • Lateral crural strut graft (LCSG): a cartilage strip placed under the lateral crus to straighten, stiffen and reposition it; used to rescue notching, pinching, retraction and external valve collapse after previous surgery. [40920505, 28953723]
  • Alar contour graft (rim graft): a thin cartilage strip along the nostril rim to support it. Combined with the lateral crural strut it becomes the extended alar contour graft. [28953723]
  • Lateral crural steal: moving the dome point laterally along the lateral crus to change projection and rotation without adding a graft; used with medial crural resection to deproject. [39212968]
  • Tripod concept: the model that treats the two lateral crura and the conjoined medial crura as three legs, so shortening or lengthening a leg rotates the tip. Current reviews state its limits rather than discard it. [35877943, 40996913]
  • Delivery and non-delivery approach: closed techniques. Non-delivery works on the cartilage in place through small incisions; delivery lifts the lower lateral cartilage out as a chondrocutaneous flap first. 22% and 78% of a 19,643-case series. [39187588]
  • Volume, projection, rotation (VPR) assessment: the qualitative examination that sorts a tip by those three axes before a technique is chosen. [39187588]
  • Pitanguy's midline ligament: the fibrous band running from the dorsum down between the domes. Repairing it to the caudal septum deepens the supratip break; transecting it in closed preservation prevents supratip depression. [40080607, 35908175]
  • Interalar ligament flap: the tissue between the alar cartilages, raised and repositioned to define the supratip and reduce tip edema instead of being discarded. [37749799]
  • Pollybeak (supratip deformity): fullness above the tip that convexes the profile. Graded here on the Supratip Fullness Rating Scale (SFRS), 0 to 3. [37798507]
  • Supratip break point: the slight dip between the dorsum and the tip. Its depth is what ligament repair changes. [40080607]
  • Tip-defining points: the paired highlights over the domes. With the supratip above and the columellar break below they form the diamond that describes an ideal tip. [28953723]
  • Goode's ratio and the Byrd method: two ways of measuring tip projection from a lateral photograph, used to compare techniques over time. [40854551, 39965161]
  • Nasolabial angle (NLA): the angle between the columella and the upper lip; the standard measure of tip rotation. [40854551, 36729933]
  • Backstay suture: a suture described to hold the tip against deviation. In 147 patients, deviation needing correction was 2.7%, below the pooled literature average. [41917227]
  • Mastoid fascia tissue graft (MFTG): fascia harvested behind the ear and laid over the tip to camouflage graft edges and contour irregularities, in place of soft cartilage. [39026388]
  • Auricular composite graft (ACG): skin and cartilage taken together from the antihelix, used to rebuild an alar-nostril ring destroyed by over-resection. [39676167]
  • ROE, NOSE, SCHNOS, GAIS: the validated questionnaires. ROE and SCHNOS-Cosmesis rate appearance, NOSE and SCHNOS-Obstruction rate breathing, GAIS grades change against a baseline photograph. A result reported without one of these is a surgeon's judgement, not a patient's. [37798507, 39187271, 37115534, 37267216]
  • Lateral wall insufficiency (LWI): a graded measure of how far the sidewall collapses on inspiration, scored by zone. [37115534]
  • Level of evidence: the rating each journal requires. Almost every series here is III or IV: retrospective, single-surgeon, no control arm. [39965161, 39212968]

The papers this rests on

The 40 papers everything above was written from. Every one links to its abstract, its authors and its DOI.

  1. FPS
    2026PMID 40854551Summary
  2. FPS
    2026PMID 42624495Summary
  3. APS
    2025PMID 39187588Summary
  4. APS
    2024PMID 37798507Summary
  5. APS
    2024PMID 38609657Summary
  6. FPSAM
    2023PMID 34516890Summary
  7. PRS
    2023PMID 36723630Summary
  8. PRS
    2022PMID 35877943Summary
  9. ASJ
    2020PMID 31675056
  10. PRS
    Systematic Surgical Approach to Alar Base Surgery in Rhinoplasty
    Rohrich RJ, Savetsky IL, Suszynski TM et al.
    2020PMID 33234955Summary
  11. PRS
    2017PMID 28953723Summary
  12. ASJ
    2026PMID 41990353Summary
  13. APS
    2026PMID 41917227Summary
  14. APS
    2026PMID 41998166Summary
  15. APS
    2026PMID 41857160Summary
  16. APS
    2026PMID 41813990Summary
  17. PRS
    2023PMID 36728586Summary
  18. PRS
    2025PMID 39965161Summary
  19. FPSAM
    2024PMID 39187271Summary
  20. PRS
    Nasal Tip Deprojection in Rhinoplasty
    Datta S, Tugertimur B, Hanna SA et al.
    2025PMID 39212968Summary
  21. PRS
    2025PMID 39026388Summary
  22. PRS
    2025PMID 40080607Summary
  23. PRS
    2024PMID 37749799Summary
  24. ASJ
    2023PMID 35908175Summary
  25. PRS
    2026PMID 40920505Summary
  26. FPSAM
    2024PMID 37115534Summary
  27. PRS
    2023PMID 36729933Summary
  28. ASJ
    2023PMID 35748855Summary
  29. PRS
    2024PMID 37307054Summary
  30. ASJ
    2024PMID 39012964Summary
  31. ASJ
    2024PMID 39042732Summary
  32. PRS
    Positioning the Nasal Tip in Rhinoplasty
    Mattos D, Hanna SA, Datta S et al.
    2025PMID 40996913Summary
  33. PRS
    2025PMID 41294316Summary
  34. ASJ
    2025PMID 39676167Summary
  35. PRS
    2026PMID 42554673Summary
  36. PRS
    2024PMID 38346139Summary
  37. ASJ
    2025PMID 40408098Summary
  38. FPSAM
    2026PMID 42210784Summary
  39. ASJ
    2025PMID 39876773Summary
  40. FPSAM
    2024PMID 37267216Summary

What is still contested

  • The strut against the extension graft is not settled in practice. One series measured a 5.1-fold risk of projection loss with a strut; the meta-analysis found no difference in Goode's ratio between them; and a 44-year algorithm still selects a tapered strut over an extension graft when the patient's incisor show demands it. [36728586, 40854551, 39042732]
  • The extension graft and the derotation graft fail in opposite directions, deviation against drooping and supratip fullness, and no study on file predicts which patient gets which. [39965161]
  • Pitanguy's ligament is repaired in one operation and transected in another, both to protect the supratip. The two were tested in different approaches (open structural against closed low-strip preservation) and never head to head. [40080607, 35908175]
  • Tip-graft evidence is thin by design: 38 of 44 studies observational, mean Newcastle-Ottawa 6.5 of 9, and only 27.3% reporting a patient-reported outcome. [36723630]
  • Revision rates are quoted over incompatible windows, 1.7% at six to twelve months, 3.8% at 22 months, 12.3% across twenty years. A rate without its follow-up period is not comparable. [39876773, 39212968, 39187588]
  • Alar base depression has two accepted fillers with opposite advantages, and the systematic review that compared them covered six studies and 165 patients. [38609657]
  • The non-surgical tip rests on one 107-patient cohort followed to six months. [37267216]
  • Almost every series is one surgeon's own patients, reported retrospectively. The direction of the findings repeats across practices; the decimal places do not transfer.

Written by rhinoplasty.cc from the PubMed abstracts, 2026-09-09. Not medical advice.

Related topics

Every paper, by year

200 papers. The 40 above are not repeated.

202627 papers · 10 above
  1. APS
    PMID 41998167Summary
  2. APS
    PMID 41731229Summary
  3. APS
    PMID 42045684Summary
  4. APS
    PMID 41345307Summary
  5. APS
    PMID 41535507
  6. APS
    PMID 41629470Summary
  7. APS
    PMID 41879850Full text
  8. APS
    Revision Rhinoplasty in Retrocolumellar Perforation
    Göde S, Aliyeva A, Apaydın MB et al.
    PMID 42082664Summary
  9. APS
    PMID 40968171Summary
  10. FPS
    PMID 39965762Summary
  11. FPS
    PMID 41418809Summary
  12. FPS
    PMID 41412191Summary
  13. FPS
    PMID 41941883Summary
  14. FPS
    PMID 41941885
  15. FPS
    Tip Tensioning in Rhinoplasty
    Schertzer JS, Farrior EH, Toman J
    PMID 41349577Summary
  16. FPSAM
    PMID 41681113
  17. PRS-GO
    PMID 42517059Summary
202526 papers · 10 above
  1. APS
    PMID 38977456Summary
  2. APS
    PMID 40055225
  3. APS
    PMID 40195133Summary
  4. APS
    PMID 40699341
  5. APS
    PMID 39322839Summary
  6. APS
    PMID 40394313Summary
  7. APS
    PMID 40646255Summary
  8. APS
    PMID 39325086Summary
  9. APS
    PMID 38977457Summary
  10. APS
    PMID 39433615Summary
  11. FPS
    PMID 38834177Summary
  12. PRS
    PMID 39999231
  13. PRS
    PMID 40996905
  14. PRS
    PMID 40996919
  15. PRS-GO
    PMID 40469545Summary
  16. PRS-GO
    PMID 40502425Summary
202414 papers · 10 above
  1. APS
    PMID 38483551Summary
  2. APS
    PMID 37567945Summary
  3. APS
    PMID 38693403Summary
  4. FPS
    PMID 38733999Summary
202311 papers · 6 above
  1. ASJ
    PMID 36004498
  2. FPS
    PMID 36423627Summary
  3. FPS
    PMID 37433309Summary
  4. FPSAM
    PMID 36946885Summary
  5. PRS
    PMID 36940157Summary
202210 papers · 1 above
  1. APS
    PMID 36323964
  2. APS
    PMID 36042029Summary
  3. APS
    PMID 36197466
  4. FPS
    PMID 35130565Summary
  5. FPS
    PMID 34704240Summary
  6. FPSAM
    PMID 34495754Summary
  7. FPS Clin
    PMID 35501057Summary
  8. PRS
    PMID 36067470
  9. PRS
    PMID 36067471
202111 papers
  1. APS
    PMID 33649928Summary
  2. APS
    PMID 34085104Summary
  3. APS
    PMID 32914325Summary
  4. APS
    PMID 32926185
  5. PRS
    PMID 34398093Summary
  6. PRS
    PMID 34644278Summary
  7. PRS
    Nasal Tip Shaping Finesse in Rhinoplasty
    Savetsky IL, Avashia YJ, Rohrich RJ
    PMID 34847114Summary
  8. PRS
    PMID 33764912
  9. PRS
    PMID 33835105Summary
  10. PRS-GO
    PMID 34815917Summary
  11. PRS-GO
    PMID 33868871Summary
202013 papers · 2 above
  1. PRS
    PMID 32332531Summary
  2. PRS
    PMID 31985674
  3. PRS
    PMID 31834232
  4. PRS
    PMID 31985676
  5. PRS
    PMID 31985675
  6. PRS
    PMID 31834230
  7. PRS
    PMID 31985677
  8. PRS
    Rhinoplasty Refinements: Addressing the Pollybeak Deformity
    Rohrich RJ, Shanmugakrishnan RR, Mohan R
    PMID 32097309Summary
  9. PRS
    PMID 32097325Summary
  10. PRS-GO
    PMID 33173698Summary
  11. PRS-GO
    PMID 32802685Summary
20199 papers
  1. APS
    PMID 30919034
  2. APS
    PMID 31342122
  3. APS
    PMID 30242461Summary
  4. APS
    PMID 30903253Summary
  5. APS
    PMID 30783724Summary
  6. APS
    PMID 31346711Summary
  7. PRS
    PMID 30601327Summary
  8. PRS
    PMID 30907809Summary
  9. PRS
    PMID 31403561
20188 papers
  1. ASJ
    PMID 29394320
  2. ASJ
    PMID 29365051Summary
  3. APS
    PMID 29124376Summary
  4. APS
    PMID 29380021
  5. APS
    PMID 29392358
  6. FPS Clin
    PMID 30005784Summary
  7. JAMA FPS
    PMID 29470562Summary
  8. PRS
    PMID 30247379
201712 papers · 1 above
  1. ASJ
    PMID 28364535
  2. ASJ
    PMID 28364534Summary
  3. ASJ
    PMID 27277275
  4. APS
    PMID 28204928Summary
  5. APS
    PMID 28008458Summary
  6. APS
    PMID 28032151Summary
  7. FPS
    PMID 29195248
  8. FPS
    PMID 28962054
  9. JAMA FPS
    PMID 28418453Summary
  10. PRS
    Managing Alar Flare in Rhinoplasty
    Rohrich RJ, Malafa MM, Ahmad J et al.
    PMID 29068925Summary
  11. PRS-GO
    PMID 28831344Summary
201612 papers
  1. ASJ
    PMID 27277274Summary
  2. ASJ
    PMID 27535924
  3. APS
    PMID 27251749Summary
  4. CPS
    PMID 26616703Summary
  5. FPS
    Columellar Aesthetics in Open Rhinoplasty
    Kridel RW, Kwak ES, Watson JB
    PMID 27494576Summary
  6. FPS
    PMID 27494583Summary
  7. JAMA FPS
    PMID 27441889Summary
  8. JAMA FPS
    PMID 26822626Summary
  9. JAMA FPS
    PMID 27585247Summary
  10. JAMA FPS
    PMID 26868130Summary
  11. PRS
    PMID 26710007Summary
  12. PRS-GO
    Evaluation of Nasal Tip Definition in Closed Rhinoplasty
    Buckley CE, McArdle A, McInerney NM et al.
    PMID 27104102Full text
201511 papers
  1. ASJ
    PMID 26116747
  2. ASJ
    PMID 26508652Full text
  3. ASJ
    PMID 26116748
  4. APS
    PMID 25673570Summary
  5. APS
    PMID 25491013Summary
  6. JAMA FPS
    PMID 26066901Summary
  7. PRS
    PMID 25811570Summary
  8. PRS
    PMID 26186345
  9. PRS
    PMID 26186343
  10. PRS
    PMID 25811564Summary
  11. PRS
    PMID 25724050
201416 papers
  1. ASJ
    Rhinoplasty: the lateral crura-alar ring
    Daniel RK, Palhazi P, Gerbault O et al.
    PMID 24682443Summary
  2. ASJ
    PMID 24936094Summary
  3. ASJ
    PMID 25028737Summary
  4. ASJ
    PMID 24604789Summary
  5. APS
    PMID 24902907Summary
  6. APS
    Interdomal-columellar myolipoma: discovered at rhinoplasty
    Finocchi V, Pellini E, Longobardi G et al.
    PMID 24414116Summary
  7. APS
    PMID 25303879Summary
  8. FPS
    PMID 24918706Summary
  9. FPS
    PMID 25076457Summary
  10. JAMA FPS
    PMID 24177341Summary
  11. JAMA FPS
    PMID 24458140Summary
  12. PRS
    PMID 24374707
  13. PRS
    PMID 24352210Summary
  14. PRS
    Decreasing nasal tip projection in rhinoplasty
    Lee MR, Geissler P, Cochran S et al.
    PMID 25028855Summary
  15. PRS
    PMID 25357023Summary
  16. PRS
    PMID 25054248Summary
20138 papers
  1. ASJ
    Rhinoplasty: congenital deficiencies of the alar cartilage
    Kosins AM, Daniel RK, Sajjadian A et al.
    PMID 23838255Summary
  2. APS
    PMID 23708246Summary
  3. FPS
    PMID 23761120Summary
  4. JAMA FPS
    PMID 23450340Summary
  5. JAMA FPS
    PMID 23165886Summary
  6. PRS
    PMID 24076670Summary
  7. PRS
    PMID 23271538
  8. PRS
    PMID 24076671
201210 papers
  1. APS
    PMID 21938592Summary
  2. APS
    PMID 22527586Summary
  3. Arch FPS
    PMID 22801799Summary
  4. Arch FPS
    PMID 22006234Summary
  5. FPS
    PMID 22872560Summary
  6. FPS
    PMID 22562566Summary
  7. PRS
    PMID 22456400
  8. PRS
    PMID 23018701Summary
  9. PRS
    PMID 22186526Summary
  10. PRS
    PMID 22418718Summary
20112 papers
  1. Arch FPS
    PMID 22106188Summary
  2. FPS
    PMID 21404163Summary