Objectives/Hypothesis Tongue-in-groove (TIG) is a conservative but powerful surgical suture technique to control shape, rotation, and projection of the nasal tip. In this study, statistical analyses were performed to determine the aesthetical and functional effectiveness of TIG rhinoplasty. Study Design Prospective cohort study including 110 Caucasian or Mediterranean aesthetic rhinoplasty patients treated by one surgeon between 2007 and 2012, with a 1-year follow-up. Methods Data were collected using the Utrecht Questionnaire, a validated instrument routinely offered to our patients before and 1 year after surgery. Aesthetic results were reflected by change in subjective body image in relation to nasal appearance, scored on five aesthetic questions and a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS). Functional results were determined by change in subjective nasal airway patency, scored on a 10-cm VAS for both sides. Results The mean aesthetic sum score (5, low burden-25, high burden) significantly improved from 14.01 to 6.54 (P <.01). The mean aesthetic VAS score (0, very ugly-10, very nice) significantly improved from 3.35 to 7.78 (P < .01). The mean functional VAS score (0, very bad-10, very good) showed a small but significant improvement on both sides (left, 6.83-7.96; right, 6.88-7.80; P <.01). Conclusion Statistical analysis of quantified subjective data on nasal aesthetics and function show that TIG is a reliable technique that can help to deliver consistently good results in Caucasian and Mediterranean patients seeking aesthetic rhinoplasty. A small additional functional improvement can be expected.

Outcome research, external rhinoplasty, tongue-in-groove, quality of life
dx.doi.org/10.1002/lary.25037, hdl.handle.net/1765/85402
The Laryngoscope
Department of Otorhinolaryngology

Lohuis, P.J.F.M, & Datema, F.R. (2015). Patient satisfaction in Caucasian and Mediterranean open rhinoplasty using the tongue-in-groove technique: Prospective statistical analysis of change in subjective body image in relation to nasal appearance following aesthetic rhinoplasty. The Laryngoscope, 125(4), 831–836. doi:10.1002/lary.25037