Silicone-Polytetrafluoroethylene Composite Implants for Asian Rhinoplasty

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid

Abstract

Background

Silicone and Gore-Tex implants are mainstays of Asian rhinoplasty. Silicone implants are inexpensive and wieldy, but may elicit a foreign-body reaction and are prone to migration. Gore-Tex implants are more biocompatible and capable of ingrowth but expensive. Silicone-polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) composites have a silicone core and PTFE liner. Composite implants have been marketed for several years, but are not yet established alternatives for rhinoplasty because of a lack of relevant reports.

Methods

From February 2012 to June 2015, 177 Asian patients underwent primary (n = 63) or secondary (n = 114) rhinoplasty using an I-shaped composite implant. One hundred fifty-nine women and 18 men were 19 to 72 years old (mean, 34 years) at the time of surgery. Composite implants were 1.5 to 5 mm thick and 3.8 to 4.5 cm long. Autologous cartilage from the septum, concha, or both was used for tip refinement in every case. Glabellar augmentation was performed in 19 (10.7%) cases.

Results

Follow-up was 6.0 months (range, 1–36 months). There were 19 (10.7%) complications including malposition/deviation (4.5%), erythema (2.3%), and infection (1.1%). Four patients were unsatisfied, citing inadequate dorsal height correction. There was an 8.8% revision rate; 7 of 12 revisions were for malposition/deviation. We did not observe implant step-offs or extrusion. There were no differences in outcomes after primary or secondary rhinoplasty, although there was a trend toward higher infection rate after primary rhinoplasty (P = 0.06).

Conclusions

I-shaped silicone-PTFE composite implants are feasible for both primary and secondary augmentation rhinoplasty in Asians. Early outcomes data suggest an overall complication rate that is comparable to PTFE alone.

Related Topics

    loading  Loading Related Articles