Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsRetrospective StudyEurope PMCOpen access

Augmentation Rhinoplasty and Centrofacial Lipofilling: Our Experience (ARCL)

Pozzi M., Susini P., di Seclì D., Schettino M., Grimaldi L., Cuomo R.

Retrospective Study with a reported sample of 307 on Facial Rejuvenation, published in J Clin Med (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsEvidence level of this study

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Retrospective Study
Journal
J Clin Med (2024)
Reported sample size
307
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
38610730
PMCID
PMC11012668
DOI
10.3390/jcm13071965

Abstract (original English)

Introduction: Augmentation rhinoplasty traditionally represents a serious challenge for plastic surgeons. The association with centrofacial lipofilling is a great approach to achieve harmonious, aesthetic results. The aim of this article is to describe our personal association between Augmentation Rhinoplasty and Centrofacial Lipofilling (ARCL) in non-Caucasian patients. Materials and Methods: In this study, we retrospectively reviewed patients treated with ARCL at our institution between January 2019 and December 2023. We described our personal approach and technique. At a minimum follow-up time of one year, post-operative pictures were taken, and patients were reassessed, evaluating aspects such as global symmetry, shape and contour of the nose, and facial harmony and rejuvenation; finally, patients' satisfaction was investigated according to the ROE questionnaire and the modified S-GAIS. Results: A total of 307 patients were included in the study. They reported a significant satisfactory aesthetic result in nasal image and facial harmony, as the mean postoperative ROE and S-GAIS score show. None of the grafts extruded or collapsed. Wounds healed without reported major infection. Conclusions: This study has demonstrated that ARCL is a safe approach that contributes to improve functional and aesthetic outcomes, has a high patient satisfaction rate, and limited post-operative c

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • Without an adequate control group, treatment effects cannot be separated from other factors.

Evidence level

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research