Home Your basket
• Fungal sinusitis: Report ...
   Price 10.50 €
• A survey of current wound...
   Price 5.50 €
• Mycobacterial cervical ly...
   Price 10.50 €
• Interest of peri-operativ...
   Price 10.50 €
• Induction chemotherapy an...
   Price 10.50 €
• Aesthetic parotidectomy: ...
   Price 8.50 €
• Electrorhinomanometric ev...
   Price 10.50 €
• Cephalic vein access for ...
   Price 10.50 €
• Perceptual assessment of ...
   Price 10.50 €
• Gastro-oesophageal reflux...
   Price 8.50 €
• Migrating esophageal fore...
   Price 5.50 €
• Metastatic angiosarcoma t...
   Price 5.50 €
• Artistic anatomy of the n...
   Price 8.50 €
• Vertical extended hemi cr...
   Price 5.50 €
• Active bone conduction im...
   Price 12.00 €
• Exophthalmos arising from...
   Price 10.50 €
• Autologous bone pate in m...
   Price 10.50 €
• Laryngeal paraganglioma m...
   Price 8.50 €
• Eye rings: Morphological ...
   Price 10.50 €
• Otologic surgery in HIV-i...
   Price 8.50 €
• Research in cancer : adva...
   Price 5.50 €
• Signs of upper Airways di...
   Price 10.50 €
• Evolution of facial nerve...
   Price 10.50 €
• Surgical exploration of t...
   Price 10.50 €
• External versus endoscopi...
   Price 14.00 €
• Vestibular neuritis: aeti...
   Price 8.50 €
• Proposal of a rating scal...
   Price 10.50 €
• Use of instrumental vocal...
   Price 10.50 €
• Anatomic evaluation of th...
   Price 10.50 €
• Bilateral facial nerve pa...
   Price 5.50 €
• The monaural pseudo-stere...
   Price 8.50 €
• Functional comparison of ...
   Price 14.00 €
• Long term results of tymp...
   Price 5.50 €

Total Order 306.00 €

contents
2019
   N# 1 |
2018
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2017
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2016
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2015
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2014
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2013
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2012
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2011
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2010
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2009
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2008
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2007
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2006
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2005
   N# | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2004
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2003
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2002
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2001
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2000
   N# | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1999
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1998
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 |
1997
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1996
   N# 4 | 5 |

Click on the number of the review to see the content
Teaching bulletin CME
List of all teaching bulletins CME.
Editor reading committee
Editor reading committee.
To publish...
Instructions for authors
Archives Press and Books
Select of books and press articles.
Mailing list
News information letter.
Subscription prices


If you wish to adjust the size of the displayed characters, click in the high menu on "Your account" and choose the desired size.



  Contents > Previous page > Article detail print Order
o Issue N# 4 - 2013 o

PLASTIC SURGERY

Aesthetic augmentation of the dorsum, mid-term results


Authors : Winter C, Gerbault O, Kestemont P, Castillo L. (Nice)

Ref. : Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol. 2013;134,4:179-184.

Article published in french
Downloadable PDF document french



Summary : Purpose of the study: Dorsum aesthetic augmentation can be divided according to their objective, total and partial increa­se or camouflage. The objective of this original article is to define the valid techniques in each indication through a cohort study, clinical cases, and current data from the lite­ra­ture. Patient and method: lt is a monocentric mono operator retrospec­tive study from 2005 to 2010 included. On 171 rhino­plasties, 57 were augmentation rhinoplasties of which 40 were of interest to the dorsum. Excluded patients were bone grafts, lost and one patient operated on a active Wegener desease. Thus 26 rhinoplasties were analyzed by an indepen­dent obser­ver. Results: All grafts confused there were 11.5% of resorption which corresponds to the data from the literature, 17% of resorption in the camouflage indications and 7% in augmen­ta­tion, as well as a higher resorption for crushed cartilage (33%) rate. There was more mobility in augmentation (28%) than in the camouflage (8%) and greater visibility of the banks of the graft in augmentation (35%) compared to the camouflage (8%). Conclusion: In the mild to severe saddle nose, the DCF is greater than cartilage monobloc or crushed in terms of stability and visibility, its indications could be expanded to harmoni­sa­tion. Camouflage crushed cartilage is not sustainable and the temporal aponeurosis could it be preferred. Resorbable fillers can offer an alternative to surgery or improve its results.

Price : 10.50 €      order
|


Subscribe online - Pay by credit card!


© Copyright 1999-2024 - Revue de Laryngologie   Réalisation - Hébergement ELIDEE