Rhinofiller: Fat Grafting (Surgical) Versus Hyaluronic Acid (Non-Surgical)

Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2023 Apr;47(2):702-713. doi: 10.1007/s00266-022-03209-7. Epub 2022 Dec 5.

Abstract

Background: The author presented his experience using "fat grafting" (FG) and "hyaluronic acid" (HA) techniques in nasal remodeling.

Objectives: The paper aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the use of FG and HA in nasal remodeling for aesthetic improvement.

Methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted. 15 patients affected by soft defects of the dorsum, low and boxy nasal tip, and hidden columella, were treated with FG (study group-SG), comparing results with the control group (CG) (n = 17) treated with hyaluronic acid (HA). Post-operative follow-up took place at 1, 2, 4, weeks, 3, 6, 12 months, and then annually.

Results: 73.7% of SG patients showed excellent cosmetic results after 1 year compared with only 29.7% of CG patients. At one-month, major part of people who underwent the treatments (FG and HA) referred to satisfaction with the resulting volume contours (p = 0.389). 88.3% of CG patients versus 53.8% of SG described the HA and FG injection, respectively, as a very comfortable and non-invasive procedure. As expected, patient satisfaction with the appearance of nasal contouring was higher in the FG group at 1 year.

Conclusions: FG and HA were safe and effective in this series of cases performed.

Level of evidence iii: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

Keywords: Nasal fat grafting; Nasal hyaluronic acid; Nose fat grafting; Plastic surgery; Rhinofiller; Rhinofilling.

Publication types

  • Randomized Controlled Trial

MeSH terms

  • Esthetics
  • Humans
  • Hyaluronic Acid*
  • Nasal Septum* / surgery
  • Patient Satisfaction
  • Treatment Outcome

Substances

  • Hyaluronic Acid