[Rhinoplasty: medicolegal issues]. / Aspects médico-légaux en rhinoplastie.

In rhinoplasty, satisfying the patient both aesthetically and functionally can be complex. In aesthetic surgery, the rhinoplastician has a reinforced obligation of means. In our experience, the functional outcome of the patient is closely linked to the morphological result. When a rhinoplasty provides the patient with full aesthetic satisfaction, even if he/she has breathing difficulties, there will be very few disputes. In primary rhinoplasty, unsatisfactory results occur in 15%-30% of the cases. While orally informing the patient is paramount, the practitioner must also have written proof of the information via documents given or sent to the various players including the patient. The taking of pre- and postoperative photographs is essential and the surgeon must keep them on file for support in case of conflict.

[Rhinoplasty: indication and planning]. / Rhinoplastik: Indikation und Planung.

A plethora of publications addresses surgical techniques in rhinoplasty, whereas substantially less has been published on psychological aspects and the planning of the procedure. This review covers the psychology of the rhinoplasty patient, risk factors for postoperative dissatisfaction, the surgeon-patient relationship, planning of the procedure using computer imaging and obtaining informed consent.

Incidence of Postoperative Adverse Events after Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Adverse events after rhinoplasty vary in etiology and severity, a fact that is reflected in the current American Society of Plastic Surgeons rhinoplasty consent form. However, there is currently no literature providing a comprehensive summation of evidence-based quantifiable risk of adverse events after rhinoplasty. Given this limitation, patients considering rhinoplasty are unable to fully ascertain preoperative risk, and the ability of physicians to obtain true informed consent is similarly flawed. This systematic review provides the first rigorous, comprehensive, and quantitative reporting of adverse events after rhinoplasty. METHODS: This review was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database (registration no. CRD42018081826) in April of 2018. Eligible articles were published in peer-reviewed journals with available abstracts and full-text articles. Interventions included primary functional, aesthetic, and combined functional/aesthetic rhinoplasty. The following data were extracted: study size, population characteristics, indication, surgical approach, concomitant procedures, and incidence of adverse events. RESULTS: A search yielded 3215 publications for title and abstract screening. Three hundred twenty-two were eligible for full-text review. Thirty-six met final inclusion criteria. A total of 13 adverse events were reported among these studies and included need for revision (0 to 10.9 percent), infection (0 to 4 percent), dehiscence (0 to 5 percent), bleeding (0 to 4.1 percent), septal perforation (0 to 2.6 percent), nasal airway obstruction requiring revision (0 to 3 percent), and hypertrophic scarring (0 to 1.5 percent). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review presents the first comprehensive and quantitative reporting of adverse event frequency after rhinoplasty. This is a crucial tool for preoperative patient counseling and an essential adjunct in the acquisition of informed consent. Future investigations will benefit from transparency and standardization of reporting to further quantify adverse event rates.

A prospective objective study of the cosmetic sequelae of nasal septal surgery.

CONCLUSIONS: Following nasal septal surgery, minor aesthetic changes may occur in up to 39.5% of patients and major changes in up to 4.5%. As part of the informed consent procedure, the potential for cosmetic changes should be discussed with all patients undergoing nasal septal surgery. OBJECTIVES: To objectively measure aesthetic changes following nasal septal surgery using pre- and post-operative photographic documentation and to highlight issues surrounding informed consent for nasal septal surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study population comprised 75 patients undergoing nasal septal surgery (septoplasty, submucous resection or revision nasal septal surgery). The main outcome measures were measurement of aesthetic changes (tip projection, supra-tip depression and columella retraction) using standardized pre- and post-operative photographic documentation examined by two independent observers. Patients' subjective perception of a change in shape of their nose was assessed using a visual analogue scale. The presence of any septal perforations was recorded at the follow-up visit (mean 15 months, range 8-13 months, standard deviation 4.2 months). RESULTS: The agreement between the two observers was very good when we considered a 1 mm difference as insignificant. Changes were arbitrarily defined as minor if < or =2 mm, and major, if > or =3 mm. With tip projection there was a minor change in 39.5% and major in 4.5% of patients. Supra-tip changes were minor in 6.7% and major in 1.3%. Minor columella changes occurred in 22% of patients, but there were no major changes. There was no statistically significant correlation between patients' subjective perception of changes in the shape of their nose with objectively measured changes. The septal perforation rate was 6.7%. Multivariate analyses (ANCOVA) showed no statistically significant influences of age, gender, grade of surgeon or type of nasal septal procedure.

Corrective rhinoplasty: medical and legal aspects.

Preoperative planning of any surgical procedure, especially rhinoplasty, is crucial in order to achieve an optimal outcome which will satisfy both the surgeon and patient. Use of imaging and the possibility of virtually displaying the changes planned by the surgeon definitely lead to a better understanding between doctor and patient. Although these new technologies have led to undeniable advantages, they have also generated unprecedented medical and legal problems. The Authors discuss a number of reflections on the legal consequences of image digital processing, the problems related to the storage of such images, and the appropriate way to draft an informed consent.

Legal disputes over informed consent for cosmetic procedures: a descriptive study of negligence claims and complaints in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Plastic surgeons and other doctors who perform cosmetic procedures face relatively high risks of malpractice claims and complaints. In particular, alleged problems with the consent process abound in this area, but little is known about the clinical circumstances of these cases. METHOD: We reviewed 481 malpractice claims and serious health care complaints resolved in Australia between 2002 and 2008 that alleged failures in the informed consent process for cosmetic and other procedures. We identified all "cases" involving cosmetic procedures and reviewed them in-depth. We calculated their frequency, and described the treatments, allegations, and outcomes involved. RESULTS: A total of 16% (77/481) of the legal disputes over informed consent involved cosmetic procedures. In 70% (54/77) of these cases, patients alleged that the doctor failed to disclose risks of a particular complication, in 39% patients claimed that potential lack of benefit was not explained, and in 26% patients allegations centred on the process by which consent was sought. Five treatment types-liposuction, breast augmentation, face/neck lifts, eye/brow lifts, and rhinoplasty/septoplasty-featured in 70% (54/77) of the cases. Scarring (30/77) and the need for reoperation (18/77) were among the most prevalent adverse health outcomes at issue. CONCLUSION: A mix of factors "supercharges" the informed consent process for cosmetic procedures. Doctors who deliver these procedures should take special care to canvas the risks and possible outcomes that matter most to patients.

Informed consent in rhinoplasty: prospective randomized study of risk recall in patients who are given written disclosure of risks versus traditional oral discussion groups.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of providing written information in enhancing patient understanding and retention. DESIGN: A multicentre prospective randomized study was conducted in university-affiliated ambulatory surgical centres. One hundred consecutive patients seen for rhinoplasty consultation were included. Patients were randomly assigned to (1) those receiving traditional oral dialogue of the surgical risks or (2) those receiving an oral discussion and a written pamphlet outlining the risks of the procedure. Fourteen to 18 days after the consultation, each patient was contacted for an assessment of risk recall. RESULTS: Overall risk recall was higher in the group that received written information (2.3 vs 1.3 of 5 risks; p < .008). As well, in the group that received a pamphlet, patients with university and postgraduate levels of education had a better rate of recall (p < .05). Female patients in both groups reported higher risk recall (p < .01). CONCLUSION: Patient risk recall of rhinoplasty is improved with the addition of written information during the informed consent process. As the process of informed consent plays a very decisive role in facial plastic surgery, enhanced postoperative satisfaction may result from the use of supplemental educational materials.