Postoperative Differences in Dorsal Aesthetic Lines in Patients Undergoing Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty and Conventional Hump Resection.

[BACKGROUND] Dorsal preservation rhinoplasty (DPR) and conventional hump resection techniques (CHR) are two distinct methods for nasal hump reduction, affecting dorsal aesthetic lines (DALs) and midvault stability differently. There is limited existing evidence regarding variations in DALs width, between these techniques.

[OBJECTIVES] To quantify DALs width variations and compare functional and aesthetic outcomes between DPR and CHR techniques in primary rhinoplasty patients.

[METHODS] A retrospective matched cohort study was conducted, including 30 patients who underwent DPR and 40 patients who underwent CHR. An artificial intelligence-driven analysis tool was employed to measure preoperative and postoperative DALs and axis angle changes. The SCHNOS (Sino-Nasal Outcome Test) was utilized to evaluate functional and aesthetic outcomes.

[RESULTS] The width of DALs at the midnose level increased significantly in both groups (DPR group: 8.835 mm to 10.120 mm; CHR group: 9.383 mm to 10.100 mm), with no statistically significant difference between the groups (p=0.089). SCHNOS-C scores indicated significant postoperative aesthetic improvement in all subgroups (p<0.001), with differences surpassing the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID). In the combined cosmetic functional subgroup, postoperative SCHNOS-O scores decreased significantly in both groups (p<0.001), with improvement exceeding the MCID. Nasal axis deviation angles significantly decreased postoperatively in both DPR (1.715 to 1.207, p=0.008) and CHR groups (1.446 to 0.751, p=0.004).

[CONCLUSIONS] Both DPR and CHR techniques effectively improve nasal aesthetics and function, with widening of DALs observed in both groups. The use of artificial intelligence technology for assessing DALs offers a valuable tool for objective evaluation in rhinoplasty.