Fresh Frozen, In-Alcohol, or Autologous Costal Cartilage? Analysis of Complications in Over 650 Revision Rhinoplasties

Background When there is insufficient autologous septal cartilage for graft sculpting in revision rhinoplasty, valid alternatives need to be found. Both autologous and homologous costal cartilage usage has been described in the literature. As there is no universally accepted consensus on cartilage choice, experience with different types of cartilage assumes significant importance in the rhinoplasty learning process.Objectives This multicenter prospective study outlined an overview of the authors' experience regarding short-term and long-term complications following revision rhinoplasty procedures in which either fresh frozen (FFCC), in-alcohol (IACC), or autologous costal cartilage (ACC) was used.Methods A total of 671 patients undergoing revision rhinoplasty between June 2015 and September 2020 were divided into 3 groups according to the type of cartilage used (Group 1, 212 patients with FFCC; Group 2, 239 patients with IACC; Group 3, 202 patients with ACC). Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and short- and long-term complications were described and discussed. A statistical analysis investigating a possible significance of the differences in complication rates was conducted.Results The data obtained indicated a short-term general complication rate of 5.05%, and a long-term complication rate of 7.04%. A statistically significant difference was identified in cartilage warping rate between the homologous cartilages in comparison to ACC.Conclusions FFCC, IACC, and ACC can be safely used in revision rhinoplasty with no statistically significant differences regarding short- and long-term complication rates. Cartilage warping rate is significantly higher for ACC compared with FFCC and IACC.