Table 2 The FFRG studies’ characteristics
Author | Year | Study time-interval | Study design | Total population | Male | Female | Mean age (years) | Mean follow-up (months) | Revision rhinoplasty cases with the use of FFRG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
John Milkovich et al. [1] | 2022 | 2019–2022 | Retrospective review | 21 | 4 | 17 | 39 (range 27–58) | 15 | 10 out of 21 |
Rod J Rohrich et al. [2] | 2022 | 2011–2020 | Retrospective review | 226 | 41 | 185 | 40.6 (range 19–74) | 12.2 | 104 out of 226 |
Raja Mohan et al. [3] | 2019 | 2014–2017 | Retrospective review | 50 | 12 | 38 | 40 (range 21–70) | 3.35 | 50 out of 50 |
Steven A Hanna et al. [4] | 2023 | 2018–2021 | Retrospective review | 282 | 27 | 255 | 35.8 (range 15–68) | 20.3 | 242 out of 282 |