medigraphic.com
Anales de Otorrinolaringología Mexicana

2016, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

Otorrinolaringología 2016; 61 (4)

Integral approach of Fausto López Infante for endonasal surgery

López-Ulloa F, Plowes-Hernández O, Ortiz-Moreno CD, Montes-Bracchini JJ

Language: Spanish
References: 14
Page: 271-279
PDF size: 431.88 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: Over the years many techniques and approaches have been described in order to perform a rhinoplasty, some based on minimally invasive techniques which complicate the work of the surgeon, reducing his field of vision and action, and in the other hand the external rhinoplasty, aggressive surgery, which leaves a scar on the outer skin of the columela.
Objetive: To present and evaluate the results of the Fausto López Infante approach to rhinoseptoplasty as a complete, comprehensive and functional technique with favorable long-term results.
Material and Method: A retrospective and descriptive study was conducted in which patient records that underwent to rhinoseptoplasty with the Fausto López Infante approach from 1989 to 2012 were reviewed.
Results: The records of 4,302 patients were analyzed, and 972 patients were included by fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Using the approach described by the author it was possible to work the septum, dorsum, valves and the nasal tip.
Conclusion: Fausto López Infante approach for integrated rhinoplasty has a number of specific concepts based on basic surgical techniques, anatomical knowledge and experience of the surgeon; so we find this technique for addressing intranasal surgery as a good option with good aesthetic and functional long term results.


REFERENCES

  1. Ricketts RM. Divine proportion in facial esthetics. Clin Plast Surg 1982;9:401-422.

  2. Cottle MH. John Orlando Roe, pioneer in modern rhinoplasty. Arch Otolaryngol 1964;80:22-27.

  3. Angelos PC, Been MJ, Toriumi DM. Contemporary review of rhinoplasty. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2012;14:238-247.

  4. Toriumi DM, Mueller RA, et al. Vascular anatomy of the nose and the external rhinoplasty approach. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1996;122:24-34.

  5. Anderson JR, Johnson CM, Adamson P. Open rhinoplasty, an assessment. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1982;90:272-274.

  6. Constantian MB, Clardy RB. The relative importance of septal and nasal vascular surgery in correcting airway obstruction in primary and secondary rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 1996;98:38-54.

  7. Stucker FJ, Burningham AR. Rhinoplasty techniques: a historical perspective and survey of 8155 single surgeon cases. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2006;8:341-345.

  8. Becker D, Ransom E, et al. Surgical treatment of nasal obstruction in rhinoplasty. Aesthet Surg J 2010;30:347-378.

  9. Kasperbauer JL, Kern EB. Nasal valve physiology. Implications in nasal surgery. Otolaryngologic Clinic North Am 1987;20:699-719.

  10. Sheen JH. Closed versus open rhinoplasty–and the debate goes on. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997;99:859-862.

  11. Daniel RK. Secondary rhinoplasty following open rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 1995;96:1539-1546.

  12. Burke AJ, Cook TA. Open versus closed rhinoplasty: what have we learned? Current Opinion in Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;8:332-336.

  13. Constantian MB, Martin JP. Why can’t more good surgeons learn rhinoplasty? Aesthet Surg J 2015;35:486-489.

  14. Palma P, Khodaei I, et al. Hybrid rhinoplasty: beyond the dichotomy of rhinoplasty techniques. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2013;33:154-162.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com