Perception of Nasal Aesthetics: Nose or Face?

BACKGROUND: Aesthetic assessment of the nose might not be limited to the nose as an isolated facial unit but might be the result of a broader perception of the whole facial image. The aim of this study was to investigate if the aesthetic evaluation of a nose is made by sole observation of the nose or influenced by the other features of the face. METHODS: Nose and face photographs of 20 voluntary models were taken from five different angles and merged into a single image of just the noses and whole faces of each model. First the nose and then the face photos were sent to a reviewer group consisting of 100 individuals from different professions to evaluate the nose's beauty on standard questionnaires with a four-week interval to complicate the recall process. RESULTS: Aesthetic evaluation of the isolated nose (Group 1) and the nose with the whole face (Group 2) were compared through Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores ranging from 1 to 10 (1: the least, 10: the highest). The mean VAS score of the Whole Face Group (5.26 ± 1.28) was significantly higher than the score of the Isolated Nose Group (4.50 ± 1.32) (p 0.001). There was no significant difference between the scores of reviewers considering their gender, profession, or experience of having an aesthetic operation previously. CONCLUSION: Current study revealed that in the evaluation of the beauty of the nose, the holistic perception of the face is as important as the perfection of the angles and proportions within the nose itself. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: 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 .

Effect of the pandemic on surgical procedures in a tertiary care hospital: A retrospective review.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine the impact of performing surgeries with necessary precautions and to evaluate demographic characteristics of operated patients during novel coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the infection rates during hospitalization and within 14 days after surgery. Material and Methods: Between March 15th, 2020 and April 30th, 2020, a total of 639 patients who had been operated on in our center were retrospectively analyzed. According to the triage system, the surgical procedures were classified as emergency, time-sensitive, and elective procedures. Data including age, sex, indication for surgery, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, pre- and postoperative symptoms, the presence and/ or absence of reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test result, type of surgery, surgical site, and documented COVID-19 infections during hospitalization and within 21 days after surgery were recorded. Results: Of the patients, 60.4% were males and 39.6% were females with a mean age of 43.08 ± 22.68 years. Malignancy was the most common indication for surgery (35.5%), followed by trauma (29.1%). The abdominal area and head and neck region were the most frequent surgical sites in 27.4% and 24.9% of the patients, respectively. Of all surgical procedures, 54.9% were emergency and 43.9% were time-sensitive procedures. Of the patients, 84.2% were in ASA Class I-II while 15.8% patients were in ASA Class III, IV and V. General anesthesia was the most common anesthesia type in 83.9% of the patients. The overall rate of COVID-19 infection was 0.63% in the preoperative period. The rate of COVID-19 infection during and after surgery was 0.31%. Conclusion: With similar infection rates to the general population, surgeries of all types can be performed safely taking preventive measures in the preand postoperative period. It would be wise to perform surgical treatment without delay in patients with an increased risk for mortality and morbidity in accordance with strict infection control principles.