Complications associated with alloplastic implants in rhinoplasty

Andrew A. Winkler, Zachary M. Soler, Paul L. Leong, Ashley Murphy, Tom Wang, Ted Cook

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

37 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the incidence of infection and extrusion of porous high-density polyethylene (pHDPE) and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) implants used in rhinoplasty at a high-volume, academic facial plastic surgery practice. Methods: A total of 662 rhinoplasty procedures performed by 3 faculty surgeons from 1999 to 2008 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, medical comorbidities, operative details, and postoperative course findings were collected from patient records. Results: The incidence of postoperative infection was 2.8% (19 of 662 patients). In each case of infection, alloplastic material had been used. Infections occurred in 1 in 5 rhinoplasty procedures in which pHDPE implants were used. In patients in whom ePTFE was used alone, the infection rate was 5.3%. Exposure developed in 12% of patients in whom an alloplast was used during surgery. Factors notably not associated with infection on bivariate analysis included sex, surgeon, purpose of procedure (functional vs cosmetic), current tobacco use, or history of cocaine use (P>.05 for all). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this study represents the largest evaluation of the use of pHDPE implants in rhinoplasty to date. Our findings are in contrast to those of previous studies regarding the use of pHDPE in rhinoplasty and parallel to those regarding the use of ePTFE. Caution is strongly recommended when considering the use of pHDPE in rhinoplasty.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)437-441
Number of pages5
JournalArchives of Facial Plastic Surgery
Volume14
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2012

Fingerprint

Rhinoplasty
Polyethylene
Polytetrafluoroethylene
Infection
Incidence
Tobacco Use
Plastic Surgery
Cocaine
Cosmetics
Comorbidity
Demography

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Complications associated with alloplastic implants in rhinoplasty. / Winkler, Andrew A.; Soler, Zachary M.; Leong, Paul L.; Murphy, Ashley; Wang, Tom; Cook, Ted.

In: Archives of Facial Plastic Surgery, Vol. 14, No. 6, 11.2012, p. 437-441.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Winkler, Andrew A. ; Soler, Zachary M. ; Leong, Paul L. ; Murphy, Ashley ; Wang, Tom ; Cook, Ted. / Complications associated with alloplastic implants in rhinoplasty. In: Archives of Facial Plastic Surgery. 2012 ; Vol. 14, No. 6. pp. 437-441.
@article{0545c23e35f645cd88e42cb832e64aab,
title = "Complications associated with alloplastic implants in rhinoplasty",
abstract = "Objective: To evaluate the incidence of infection and extrusion of porous high-density polyethylene (pHDPE) and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) implants used in rhinoplasty at a high-volume, academic facial plastic surgery practice. Methods: A total of 662 rhinoplasty procedures performed by 3 faculty surgeons from 1999 to 2008 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, medical comorbidities, operative details, and postoperative course findings were collected from patient records. Results: The incidence of postoperative infection was 2.8{\%} (19 of 662 patients). In each case of infection, alloplastic material had been used. Infections occurred in 1 in 5 rhinoplasty procedures in which pHDPE implants were used. In patients in whom ePTFE was used alone, the infection rate was 5.3{\%}. Exposure developed in 12{\%} of patients in whom an alloplast was used during surgery. Factors notably not associated with infection on bivariate analysis included sex, surgeon, purpose of procedure (functional vs cosmetic), current tobacco use, or history of cocaine use (P>.05 for all). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this study represents the largest evaluation of the use of pHDPE implants in rhinoplasty to date. Our findings are in contrast to those of previous studies regarding the use of pHDPE in rhinoplasty and parallel to those regarding the use of ePTFE. Caution is strongly recommended when considering the use of pHDPE in rhinoplasty.",
author = "Winkler, {Andrew A.} and Soler, {Zachary M.} and Leong, {Paul L.} and Ashley Murphy and Tom Wang and Ted Cook",
year = "2012",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1001/archfacial.2012.583",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "437--441",
journal = "JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery",
issn = "2168-6076",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Complications associated with alloplastic implants in rhinoplasty

AU - Winkler, Andrew A.

AU - Soler, Zachary M.

AU - Leong, Paul L.

AU - Murphy, Ashley

AU - Wang, Tom

AU - Cook, Ted

PY - 2012/11

Y1 - 2012/11

N2 - Objective: To evaluate the incidence of infection and extrusion of porous high-density polyethylene (pHDPE) and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) implants used in rhinoplasty at a high-volume, academic facial plastic surgery practice. Methods: A total of 662 rhinoplasty procedures performed by 3 faculty surgeons from 1999 to 2008 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, medical comorbidities, operative details, and postoperative course findings were collected from patient records. Results: The incidence of postoperative infection was 2.8% (19 of 662 patients). In each case of infection, alloplastic material had been used. Infections occurred in 1 in 5 rhinoplasty procedures in which pHDPE implants were used. In patients in whom ePTFE was used alone, the infection rate was 5.3%. Exposure developed in 12% of patients in whom an alloplast was used during surgery. Factors notably not associated with infection on bivariate analysis included sex, surgeon, purpose of procedure (functional vs cosmetic), current tobacco use, or history of cocaine use (P>.05 for all). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this study represents the largest evaluation of the use of pHDPE implants in rhinoplasty to date. Our findings are in contrast to those of previous studies regarding the use of pHDPE in rhinoplasty and parallel to those regarding the use of ePTFE. Caution is strongly recommended when considering the use of pHDPE in rhinoplasty.

AB - Objective: To evaluate the incidence of infection and extrusion of porous high-density polyethylene (pHDPE) and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) implants used in rhinoplasty at a high-volume, academic facial plastic surgery practice. Methods: A total of 662 rhinoplasty procedures performed by 3 faculty surgeons from 1999 to 2008 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, medical comorbidities, operative details, and postoperative course findings were collected from patient records. Results: The incidence of postoperative infection was 2.8% (19 of 662 patients). In each case of infection, alloplastic material had been used. Infections occurred in 1 in 5 rhinoplasty procedures in which pHDPE implants were used. In patients in whom ePTFE was used alone, the infection rate was 5.3%. Exposure developed in 12% of patients in whom an alloplast was used during surgery. Factors notably not associated with infection on bivariate analysis included sex, surgeon, purpose of procedure (functional vs cosmetic), current tobacco use, or history of cocaine use (P>.05 for all). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this study represents the largest evaluation of the use of pHDPE implants in rhinoplasty to date. Our findings are in contrast to those of previous studies regarding the use of pHDPE in rhinoplasty and parallel to those regarding the use of ePTFE. Caution is strongly recommended when considering the use of pHDPE in rhinoplasty.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84872121406&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84872121406&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/archfacial.2012.583

DO - 10.1001/archfacial.2012.583

M3 - Article

VL - 14

SP - 437

EP - 441

JO - JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery

JF - JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery

SN - 2168-6076

IS - 6

ER -