Gryskiewicz, Joe M.

Background: The most critical exam components in patients seeking rhinoplasty have not been established. Objective: To identify concordance among experienced rhinoplasty surgeons regarding the most important exam features for various deformities. Methods: An online questionnaire was distributed to board-certified facial plastic and plastic surgeons experienced in rhinoplasty, with seven nasal deformity categories: dorsal hump, crooked nose, boxy tip, pinched tip, droopy tip, saddle nose, and nonallergic nasal obstruction. For each, respondents were asked to rank the three most important anatomic regions to examine from the following: nasal bones, midvault cartilage, skin, radix, facial profile, lip, tip, septum, internal nasal valve, nostrils, inferior and middle turbinates. For each ranked region, up to three important features were chosen. Normalized Attention Scores (NAS) were calculated to determine agreement amongst surgeons. Results: A total of 13 facial plastic and 8 plastic surgeons were invited to participate and completed the questionnaire. All cases had high agreement demonstrated by NAS, with the dorsal hump case exhibiting the greatest variability in responses. Conclusions: In this survey of 21 rhinoplasty surgeons, there was general agreement regarding the most relevant anatomical structures and features, which may provide a conceptual foundation for identifying key exam features for seven common complaints in patients seeking rhinoplasty.

Abstract The principles of achieving an aesthetically pleasing and harmonious facial appearance are influenced by our evolving understanding of the three-dimensional topography of the face coupled with novel approaches to midface volumization and contouring. In parallel with the evolving landscape of facial aesthetic surgery, an increasing number of publications have emerged focusing on the role of intraoral buccal fat pad removal (BFPR) for the purposes of aesthetic midface contouring. The authors sought to emphasize an underreported and potentially preventable and untoward complication involving iatrogenic parotid duct injury following BFPR. The purpose of this publication is 3-fold: (1) to review the relevant anatomy and literature on intraoral BFPR, (2) to present a case example of this complication, and (3) to discuss treatment options as part of a proposed management algorithm. The authors detail the surgical indications for performing BFPR and review the relevant anatomic considerations. Complication prevention strategies are outlined, and details regarding avoidance of parotid duct injury are reviewed. The diagnostic criteria and clinical presentation of parotid duct injuries following BFPR are comprehensively outlined. The authors present a clinically actionable algorithm for managing a suspected or diagnosed parotid duct injury following BFPR. A clinical case example is discussed to highlight this complication, the diagnostic criteria, and the systematic and algorithmic approach to management. Intraoral BFPR is an incredibly valuable and powerful procedure that can improve facial contour in patients with buccal lipodystrophy or buccal fat pad pseudoherniation. The authors propose a proper diagnostic approach and treatment algorithm to manage this untoward complication. Level of Evidence: 5

Abstract This is a single-surgeon experience detailing the senior author’s (J.G.) minimal-touch technique for placement of breast implants. Adams et al. 14-point plan has been incorporated into the technique, and the implant box paper cover sheet is used as a barrier between the patient and the implant near the incision during placement. Over a period of ten years, the senior author reports a less than 1% development in capsular contracture using this technique and no implant fractures. These findings elucidate the importance of describing this alternative technique to other barriers currently on the market. Level of Evidence: 4