Cartilage grafts in revision rhinoplasty

Why grafts matter in revision

Primary rhinoplasty often uses the patient's own septal cartilage — abundant, easy to access, and structurally ideal. By the time you're in revision, much of that septal cartilage has already been used (or removed). Revision technique therefore depends heavily on graft sourcing strategy.

Three main graft sources, each with distinct properties and ideal uses:

Septal cartilage (if available)

The first choice when remaining septum is sufficient. Properties:

• Strong but flexible — Ideal for spreader grafts, columellar struts, septal extensions
• Anatomically native — Same tissue type as where it's being placed
• No second incision — Already accessing the area
• Limited supply in revision — May be partly or fully harvested in primary

When I use it: Always first choice if >1 cm × 2 cm of intact septum remains. Even small amounts can supply alar rim grafts, supratip onlay, or tip grafts.

Limitation: Many revision cases have insufficient septum. Either the primary surgeon over-harvested, the cartilage healed thin and weak, or there's a perforation that disrupts integrity.

Auricular (ear) cartilage

The conchal bowl of the ear provides moderate-quantity grafts. Properties:

• Curved natural shape — Useful for nostril rim, columellar curve
• Softer than septum — Gentler feel, less rigid support
• Visible scar potential — Posterior auricular incision generally heals very well
• Limited quantity — One ear can give roughly 2-3 cm × 1 cm of usable cartilage; both ears can be harvested if needed
• No effect on ear shape — Properly harvested, the ear's external appearance is preserved

When I use it: Moderate-complexity revisions where septum is partly used but spreader-graft volume is needed. Tip grafts, alar rim grafts, supratip onlay. Many "standard revisions" use ear cartilage as the primary source.

Limitation: Curved natural shape is less ideal for straight structural grafts (spreaders, columellar struts often need straighter material). Carving and stacking can compensate but adds operative time.

Costal (rib) cartilage

The reference standard for major reconstruction. Properties:

• Abundant supply — Whole-cartilage segments available, can shape any graft type
• Structurally strong — Excellent for L-strut reconstruction, dorsal augmentation, large grafts
• Patient's own tissue — Better than any synthetic alternative, no rejection
• Second surgical site — Small incision (3-4 cm) under the breast, in inframammary fold for women, parallel to natural skin lines for men
• Modest scar — Becomes nearly invisible by 12 months in most patients

Concerns about rib that I address

Donor site pain: Real but manageable. Local anesthetic infiltration, intercostal block, and 3-5 days of standard post-op pain medication. Most patients describe rib site as 6/10 first 48 hours, dropping rapidly.

Pneumothorax risk: Very low (<1%) with careful technique. The pleura is identified and protected throughout harvest. If accidentally entered, it's repaired immediately and almost never has long-term consequences.

Cartilage warping: Rib cartilage tends to curve over years if carved against the grain. Modern technique uses concentric carving (matched grain orientation) and pre-soaking to detect curl tendency before insertion. With proper technique, late warping is uncommon.

Visible scar: The 3-4 cm incision is placed in inframammary fold (below the breast crease) in women, where it's hidden by anatomy and clothing. In men, a parallel-to-skin-lines incision in the lower chest. By 12 months, most patients say their rib scar is less visible than they expected.

When I use it:

• Saddle nose deformity — Rib is required for the structural rebuild
• Major dorsal augmentation (>3-4 mm needed)
• Third revisions and beyond — Other graft sources usually exhausted
• Severe over-resection requiring substantial rebuild
• Patient request — Some patients prefer rib over multiple ear harvests

Comparison at a glance

Synthetic and processed alternatives

Some revision surgeons use synthetic implants (Gore-Tex, silicone, Medpor) or processed allograft (irradiated rib, AlloDerm). My position:

• Autologous tissue is preferred in all cases where adequate supply exists — best long-term integration, lowest rejection/infection risk
• Synthetic implants have specific indications (some Asian aesthetic preferences, certain reconstructive scenarios) but carry higher long-term complication rates
• Irradiated rib can be useful when the patient wishes to avoid second-site harvest, but has higher resorption rate (10-30% volume loss over years) than fresh autologous

For most of my revision practice, the answer is the patient's own tissue from septum, ear, or rib — selected based on what the case requires.

How I decide the source

In consultation, I evaluate:

1. What graft volume does the case need? Minimal/moderate/major.
2. What's available from septum? CT or examination assessment.
3. What's the patient's preference? Some prefer to avoid rib harvest, others prefer it over multiple ear harvests.
4. Are there donor site contraindications? Prior chest surgery, ear deformity.

The plan is then built around best-fit, not surgeon preference. Some cases use all three sources; others use only one.

Related reading