How to cite this article:
Tungkeeratichai J, Bhongmakapat T, Saitongdee P, Orathai P, Urathamakul S, Chintrakarn C, Kunachak S. Is the Silicone Implant actually in the Subperiosteal Pocket in Augmented Rhinoplasty?. Int J Otorhinolaryngol Clin 2013; 5 (4):1-3.
To identify the right plane in augmented rhinoplasty to help facilitate the facial plastic surgeons in creating more natural look in oriental noses.
Materials and methods
One hundred and ten adult Thai cadavers comprising 61 males and 49 females from Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Science, Mahidol University were included in this study. Augmentation rhinoplasty with the closed technique was performed by using silicone prosthesis; then, surgical incision was done at midline from nasion to nasal tip to identify the correlation between silicone and periosteum in the area of rhinion and nasion.
This study included 61 male and 49 female cadavers. At the rhinion, silicones were placed in subperiosteal plane of 65 cadavers (59.1%) and above periosteum of 45 cadavers (40.9%). In nasion area, silicones were successfully inserted below periosteum of 109 cadavers (99.1%). However, silicone was placed in the supraperiosteum of only one cadaver (0.9%).
Silicone can be inserted into subperiosteal layer in the area of nasion easier than in the area of rhinion. Augmented rhinoplasty by using silicone insertion in subperiosteal plane, at lease in the nasion area, makes it more natural look, stable and can prevent misalignment.
Cross-sectional imaging plays a vital role in the diagnostic evaluation of oral and oropharyngeal cancers. This article discusses important technical issues related to CT scan examination, cross-sectional anatomy, patterns of tumor spread and role of imaging in pretreatment staging and post-treatment surveillance.
Evolution in ultrasound technology leads to birth of high frequency, high resolution linear transducers which in turn revolutionized the imaging of superficial structures. The majority of cases presenting to clinician in day-to-day practice as facial lumps or neck lump could be evaluated using ultrasound and help in imaging of salivary gland lesions. The age of the clinical presentation and morphological characteristics of lesions on ultrasound helped us in making confident diagnosis which was correlated on fine needle aspiration cytology/histopathology studies.
Extraskeletal osteochondroma in parapharyngeal space is very rare. It is important to note that such a diagnosis be considered when a discrete, ossified mass is localized in soft tissues, even at atypical sites. Its diagnosis is based on radiological and histopathological examination. We should be clinically aware of this benign entity as no malignant transformation or metastasis has been reported. Excision with adequate cuff of tissue is treatment of choice. We did not encounter any case report of osteochondroma in the parapharyngeal space in literature, with our best possible effort.