Table 5. Included articles' characteristics.

[2-5,8-16,18-20]

NRCT: Non-randomised clinical trial; N/A: Not applicable; HA: Hyaluronic acid; NSR: Non-surgical rhinoplasty; SR: Surgical rhinoplasty

Study reference	Type of study	Number of papers reviewed if applicable	Number of patients included if applicable	Patients’ satisfaction with NSR	Main complications with the use of NSR	The main outcome of the research
Baser et al. [8]	NRCT	N/A	20	High	None	The study illustrates the use of NSR in treating patients with nose imperfections, emphasizing the use of HA fillers for NSR over other agents due to their safe profile and reversible results. The study also highlights the importance of using the correct technique when injecting fillers into the nose to prevent adverse effects associated with inadequate treatment.
Bektas et al. [9]	Case-series study	N/A	85	90.5%	1) Redness and vascular impairment	NSR is a viable alternative to SR for patients who decline surgical procedures. HA fillers are the preferred method for NSR because they can be readily dissolved if patients are dissatisfied with the results.
Beneduce et al. [3]	Systematic review study	14	N/A	N/A	N/A	The duration of NSR's effects is intricate and can vary among individuals, necessitating further studies for a comprehensive understanding.
Bertossi et al. [10]	NRCT	N/A	107	High	Redness and swelling, infection, and lumps	NSR is a safe, efficient, and cost-effective alternative to SR for treating minor nasal abnormalities like a pronounced hump, under-projected tip, nasal depressions, saddle nose, and trauma-related disorders. NSR often results in great patient satisfaction and can produce effects that persist between eight months and a year. Patients are recommended to consider repeating the operation around one year later to maintain the desired outcomes and assure sustained pleasure.
Bouaoud and Belloc [18]	Systematic review study	15	N/A	80-100%	Skin necrosis and severe bruising	Surgery continues to be the gold standard for nose correction procedures. However, it can be concluded that NSR can complement SR, potentially reducing costs, procedure duration, and long-term adverse effects.
De Rosa et al. [11]	Cohort study	N/A	74	High	Haematoma, granuloma, and swellings	NSR serves as a favourable alternative to SR, achieving high patient satisfaction with results lasting up to one year post-treatment. Furthermore, the findings indicate that NSR is not associated with significant adverse effects.
Esen et al. [5]	NRCT	N/A	40	High	Skin necrosis, supratip deformity and irregular outline if the area overlying the dorsal cartilage is overfilled, oedema, erythema, pain, and bruising	NSR successfully enhanced minor nasal deformities and improved the quality of life for patients. This study also delved into various types of fillers, outlining their advantages and disadvantages when administered around the nose. Additionally, the study provided insights into diverse techniques applicable to filler treatments around the nose.
Giammarioli and Liberti [2]	NRCT	N/A	101	84.2%	Infection, mild oedema, and bruising	The study results have demonstrated that NSR is an effective and safe procedure, leading to high patient satisfaction. Nevertheless, further research is necessary to evaluate its long-term outcomes.
He et al. [12]	Cohort study	N/A	46	Low	Surface irregularity of the nose, redness and swelling, and depression	Improper injection of NSR can impose a significant psychological burden on patients' lives. Those who subsequently underwent surgical curettage to remove the improperly injected material reported satisfaction and experienced an improved quality of life.
Josipovic et al. [13]	NRCT	N/A	20	High	Haematoma	This study focused on the five-point liquid rhinoplasty technique. The findings revealed that NSR using this specific technique is a fast, efficient, and safe procedure, offering a viable alternative to surgery. Additionally, the study demonstrated that the outcomes of this procedure typically hinge on the depth of injection and the positioning of four out of the five injection points along the midline.
Jung et al. [14]	NRCT	N/A	20	N/A	N/A	Direct percutaneous injection from the glabella can improve the precision of sellion filler augmentation rhinoplasty, potentially lowering the risk of problems like vision loss and skin necrosis due to vascular compromise.
Mortada et al. [19]	Systematic review study	23	N/A	75-98%	Bruising and pain. The uneven surface of the nasal dorsum	NSR is associated with minimal side effects and requires a short healing period. Furthermore, it has consistently led to excellent patient satisfaction.
Raggio and Asaria [20]	Research paper	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	This paper highlights the advantages of employing NSR as a substitute for SR. The study also delves into various techniques employed in this form of treatment. Additionally, the review addresses the limitations of NSR, particularly its effectiveness in cases involving patients with severe dorsal humps, deviation, and tip rotation, as these individuals may not derive significant benefits from NSR.
Ramos et al. [15]	Case-series study	N/A	3 cases	N/A	N/A	Patients who opt for NSR and later decide to undergo SR must choose between waiting for the fillers to naturally reabsorb, utilizing hyaluronidase to dissolve the fillers, or proceeding with SR directly if the fillers cannot be reabsorbed.
Santorelli and Marlino [4]	NRCT	N/A	62	>80%	Pain, oedema, and haematoma in the dorsum of the nose	The treatment with 1 ml of HA fillers yielded high patient satisfaction and produced favourable results.
Trivisonno et al. [16]	Observational case-series study	N/A	14	80%	No major side effects	This study concentrated on the utilization of fluid cartilage as a form of NSR, demonstrating its effectiveness in addressing minor irregularities of the nose dorsum with minimal side effects.