This Article  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

IRVING B. GOLDMAN, M.D.

AMA Arch Otolaryngol. 1956;63(3):252-253.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Rhinoplastic surgeons not infrequently after a satisfactory operation are confronted by patients who complain of a new deformity. The surgeons are aware that after removal of dressings the nose appeared satisfactory. When the patient returns on subsequent visits a change is sometimes noted in the shape of the nose, which is attributed to the reparative healing process. On occasions undue tissue reactions are seen. By careful questioning it soon appears that the patient failed to mention that postoperative trauma occurred. Rarely does the patient freely admit that the damaged nose was struck accidentally or intentionally.

The following are some examples:

Case 1.

—Two weeks following a satisfactory rhinoplasty, the patient, a physician's daughter, returned accompanied by her father. There was swelling of the bony and upper cartilaginous vaults. She was casually asked if there was any cause for this surprising effect. She admitted that one night the lights were out . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
New York

From the Division of Rhinoplasty, Otolaryngological Service, Mount Sinai Hospital.

Footnotes
Accepted for publication Nov. 7, 1955.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?