Research Article

Spreader Grafts Versus Autospreader Flaps in Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Comparison of Functional Performance, Midvault Aesthetics, and Patient Satisfaction

Volume: 9 Number: 2 August 5, 2026

Spreader Grafts Versus Autospreader Flaps in Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Comparison of Functional Performance, Midvault Aesthetics, and Patient Satisfaction

Abstract

Objective The aesthetic and functional outcomes of modern rhinoplasty are profoundly affected by middle vault restoration. After dorsal reduction, the most common methods for restoring middle vault integrity include spreader grafts and autospreader flaps. This study compared spreader grafts and autospreader flaps with respect to functional performance, midvault aesthetics, patient satisfaction, and objective aesthetic outcomes, as measured by the Integrated Nasal Tip Aesthetic Score (INTAS). Methods Between January 2022 and December 2025, seventy patients underwent primary open rhinoplasty with middle vault reconstruction. This study was a retrospective cohort. One group of patients underwent spreader graft reconstruction (n=35), while the other group underwent autospreader flap reconstruction (n=35). Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) was used to assess functional outcomes. The Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE), Midvault Aesthetic Score, and Integrated Nasal Tip Aesthetic Score (INTAS) were used to assess aesthetic outcomes. Additionally, we examined rates of revision surgery, complications, and patient satisfaction. Within and between groups, researchers assessed patients' outcomes before and after surgery. Results Nasal function and appearance improved markedly in both groups after surgery. Although the SG group had slightly lower postoperative NOSE ratings, both groups showed significant improvement. After surgery, the return on equity (ROE) was 9.04 ± 0.62 for the SG group and 8.55 ± 0.62 for the ASF group. Patients treated with spreader grafts had significantly higher mean postoperative INTAS scores (49.9 ± 3.6) than those treated with autospreader flaps (47.9 ± 3.8). The SG group also had higher Midvault Aesthetic Scores. Patient satisfaction was consistently high in both groups (8.98 ± 0.71 vs. 8.73 ± 0.82). Rates of complications and revisions were similar across the groups. Conclusion After rhinoplasty, patients achieved excellent outcomes with spreader grafts and autospreader flaps, both functionally and aesthetically. Although both methods restored middle vault function and improved patient satisfaction, spreader grafts yielded better aesthetic results, with higher scores on the Midvault Aesthetic Score, Return on Investment, and INTAS. These results provide additional evidence that spreader grafts can improve cosmetic accuracy without compromising functionality.

Keywords

Supporting Institution

N/A

Ethical Statement

Ethics Committee Approval: This study strictly followed the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical approval was obtained from the Toros University ethics committee (meeting date: May 2026).

References

  1. 1. Pruthi A, Dobratz EJ, Dougherty W. Management of the Middle Vault. Facial Plastic Surgery . 2023;39(6):609-615. doi:10.1055/a-2148-2141
  2. 2. Kim L, Papel ID. Spreader Grafts in Functional Rhinoplasty. Facial Plastic Surgery . 2016;32(1):29-35. doi:10.1055/s-0035-1570127
  3. 3. Özmen S, Ayhan S, Fındıkçıoğlu K, Kandal S, Atabay K. Upper Lateral Cartilage Fold-in Flap: A Combined Spreader and/or Splay Graft Effect Without Cartilage Grafts. Annals of Plastic Surgery . 2008;61(5):527-532. doi:10.1097/sap.0b013e31816dd359
  4. 4. Gruber RP, Melkun ET, Woodward JF, Perkins SW. Dorsal Reduction and Spreader Flaps. Aesthetic Surgery Journal . 2011;31(4):456-464. doi:10.1177/1090820x11404401
  5. 5. Gassner HG, Friedman O, Sherris DA, Kern EB. An Alternative Method of Middle Vault Reconstruction. Archives of Facial Plastic Surgery . 2006;8(6):432-435. doi:10.1001/archfaci.8.6.432
  6. 6. Karabağlı Y, Ekinci C, Karabağlı S, Özşahin G. Supraseptal groove fold-in flap for the reconstruction of middle vault in primary rhinoplasty. JPRAS Open . 2025;45:251-259. doi:10.1016/j.jpra.2025.06.005
  7. 7. Reiffel AJ, Cross KJ, Spinelli HM. Nasal Spreader Grafts. Annals of Plastic Surgery . 2010;66(1):24-28. doi:10.1097/sap.0b013e3181d3ef8e
  8. 8. Yoon SH, Kim CS, Oh JW, Lee KC. Optimal harvest and efficient use of septal cartilage in rhinoplasty. Archives of Craniofacial Surgery . 2021;22(1):11-16. doi:10.7181/acfs.2020.00486

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Otorhinolaryngology

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

August 5, 2026

Submission Date

June 11, 2026

Acceptance Date

June 13, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 9 Number: 2

APA
Arslanoğlu, A., Değirmenci, A., & Yeşilova, M. (2026). Spreader Grafts Versus Autospreader Flaps in Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Comparison of Functional Performance, Midvault Aesthetics, and Patient Satisfaction. European Journal of Rhinology and Allergy, 9(2), 70-75. https://doi.org/10.65396/ejra.1969087
AMA
1.Arslanoğlu A, Değirmenci A, Yeşilova M. Spreader Grafts Versus Autospreader Flaps in Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Comparison of Functional Performance, Midvault Aesthetics, and Patient Satisfaction. Eur J Rhinol Allergy. 2026;9(2):70-75. doi:10.65396/ejra.1969087
Chicago
Arslanoğlu, Ahmet, Ali Değirmenci, and Mesut Yeşilova. 2026. “Spreader Grafts Versus Autospreader Flaps in Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Comparison of Functional Performance, Midvault Aesthetics, and Patient Satisfaction”. European Journal of Rhinology and Allergy 9 (2): 70-75. https://doi.org/10.65396/ejra.1969087.
EndNote
Arslanoğlu A, Değirmenci A, Yeşilova M (August 1, 2026) Spreader Grafts Versus Autospreader Flaps in Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Comparison of Functional Performance, Midvault Aesthetics, and Patient Satisfaction. European Journal of Rhinology and Allergy 9 2 70–75.
IEEE
[1]A. Arslanoğlu, A. Değirmenci, and M. Yeşilova, “Spreader Grafts Versus Autospreader Flaps in Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Comparison of Functional Performance, Midvault Aesthetics, and Patient Satisfaction”, Eur J Rhinol Allergy, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 70–75, Aug. 2026, doi: 10.65396/ejra.1969087.
ISNAD
Arslanoğlu, Ahmet - Değirmenci, Ali - Yeşilova, Mesut. “Spreader Grafts Versus Autospreader Flaps in Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Comparison of Functional Performance, Midvault Aesthetics, and Patient Satisfaction”. European Journal of Rhinology and Allergy 9/2 (August 1, 2026): 70-75. https://doi.org/10.65396/ejra.1969087.
JAMA
1.Arslanoğlu A, Değirmenci A, Yeşilova M. Spreader Grafts Versus Autospreader Flaps in Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Comparison of Functional Performance, Midvault Aesthetics, and Patient Satisfaction. Eur J Rhinol Allergy. 2026;9:70–75.
MLA
Arslanoğlu, Ahmet, et al. “Spreader Grafts Versus Autospreader Flaps in Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Comparison of Functional Performance, Midvault Aesthetics, and Patient Satisfaction”. European Journal of Rhinology and Allergy, vol. 9, no. 2, Aug. 2026, pp. 70-75, doi:10.65396/ejra.1969087.
Vancouver
1.Ahmet Arslanoğlu, Ali Değirmenci, Mesut Yeşilova. Spreader Grafts Versus Autospreader Flaps in Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Comparison of Functional Performance, Midvault Aesthetics, and Patient Satisfaction. Eur J Rhinol Allergy. 2026 Aug. 1;9(2):70-5. doi:10.65396/ejra.1969087

You can find the current version of the Instructions to Authors at: https://www.eurjrhinol.org/en/instructions-to-authors-104

Starting on 2020, all content published in the journal is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 International
License which allows third parties to use the content for non-commercial purposes as long as they give credit to the original work. This license
allows for the content to be shared and adapted for non-commercial purposes, promoting the dissemination and use of the research published in
the journal.
The content published before 2020 was licensed under a traditional copyright, but the archive is still available for free access.