Onlay Fascial Grafts to Silicone-Polytetrafluorethylene Composite Implants in Augmentation Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Study of 241 Cases.

[BACKGROUND] Silicone-polytetrafluoroethylene composite implants are fast gaining popularity in Asian rhinoplasty. Nonetheless, implant displacement, erythematous reactions, and infections still occur in the authors' patient group during long-term follow-up.

[OBJECTIVES] The authors reported successful experience of combining the utilization of silicone-polytetrafluoroethylene composite implants with onlay temporal fascial grafts to circumvent these complications.

[METHODS] Sixty-four patients of Asian ethnicity underwent augmentation rhinoplasty utilizing an I-shaped composite implant with an onlay fascial graft from January 2015 to June 2018, with a mean follow-up period of 13.5 months. This patient group was compared with a control group of 177 Asian patients who underwent augmentation rhinoplasty utilizing the same composite implant but without the addition of a fascial graft; the control group was treated from February 2012 to June 2015, with a mean follow-up of 42.0 months. Complications were compared between these 2 patient groups, specifically focusing on malposition/deviations, erythema, and infections.

[RESULTS] There was a marked decrease in complication rates with the addition of an onlay temporal fascial graft to cover the composite implant in augmentation rhinoplasty (7.8% vs 14.7%) as well as the rate of erythematous reactions (0% vs 6.2%, P = 0.04), infection (1.6% vs 1.1%), and implant malposition/deviation (0% vs 4.5%). Harvesting the temporal fascia and fashioning the onlay graft added an additional 33 minutes on average per procedure. No donor site morbidity was encountered.

[CONCLUSIONS] Although the operative time increased, the benefits of adding onlay fascial grafts to silicone-polytetrafluoroethylene implants in alloplastic augmentation rhinoplasty outweigh the drawbacks, as evidenced by the decrease in erythematous reactions.