ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of equine cartilage as a competent xenograft material for rhinoplasty were evaluated and compared to the outcomes of rhinoplasty using silicone implants. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, double-blind, non-inferiority, and randomized confirmatory study. Fifty-six patients were randomized 1:1 to the study group (using MegaCartilage-E) and control group (using silicone implants). The Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) score, photo documentation, Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS), and adverse event data were obtained until 12 months after surgery. The primary efficacy, which is the change in ROE score 6 months after surgery, was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat set. The secondary efficacy was evaluated in the per-protocol set by assessing the change in ROE score 6 and 12 months after surgery and nasofrontal angle, the height of the nasion, and GAIS 1, 6, and 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: The change in ROE score of the study group was non-inferior to that of the control group; it increased by 24.26 ± 17.24 in the study group and 18.27 ± 17.60 in the control group (p = 0.213). In both groups, all secondary outcome measures increased, but there was no statistical difference. In the safety set, treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 10 patients (35.71%) in the study group and six patients (21.43%) in the control group (p = 0.237). There were 13 adverse device events in the study group and six adverse device events in the control group (p = 0.515). CONCLUSION: Processed equine cartilage can be used effectively and safely as xenograft material for rhinoplasty.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients with secondary deformities associated with unilateral cleft lip and nose might also suffer from nostril stenosis due to a lack of tissue volume in the nostril on the cleft side. Here, we used full-thickness skin grafts (FTSGs) to reduce nostril stenosis and various methods for skin volume augmentation. We compared the changes in the symmetry of both nostrils before and after surgery. METHODS: From February 2016 to January 2020, 34 patients underwent secondary cheiloplasty and open rhinoplasty for secondary deformities of the unilateral cleft lip and nose with nostril stenosis. FTSG was used on the nostril floor, nasal columella, and alar inner lining. The measured nasal profile included the nostril surface, nostril circumference, width of the nostril floor, and distance from the alar-facial groove to the nasal tip. The "overlap area," which was defined as the largest overlapping area when the image of the cleft nostril was flipped to the left and right and overlaid on the image of the normal side nostril, was also calculated. The degree of symmetry was evaluated by dividing the value of the cleft side by that of the normal side of each measured profile and expressed as "ratios." RESULTS: The results of all profile ratios, except for the nostril floor width, became significantly close to 1, which represents full symmetry. The overlap area ratio improved from 62.7% to 77.3%, meaning that the length and width of the nostril as well as the overall shape became similar (p< 0.05). CONCLUSION: When performing cleft rhinoplasty with nostril stenosis, FTSG is useful to achieve symmetry in the nostril size and shape. Skin grafting is simpler to perform than the other types of local flap, and the results are generally satisfactory.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Even though scars are major issues for patients who undergo facial lacerations, programs for their prevention and early management are not well established. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of prophylactic scar assessments and early scar interventions in patients with lacerations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 116 patients underwent suture line and scar prevention treatment in the emergency room from 2014 to 2015. In the retrospective study, 46 patients who met all the criteria were included in the study. They were assigned to one of the following two scar prevention programs: the standard scar program for prevention, which included taping, silicone sheets, and ointments, and the multimodality scar program for treatment, which included triamcinolone, botulinum toxins, or CO2 fractional lasers. The patterns of early scar program were investigated for the standard scar prevention program and the multimodality scar management program, and we evaluated the scar assessment scores of the patients at 3 and 6 months. RESULTS: Scar scores for the patients who received multimodality scar management showed statistically significant improvements in Patient Scar Assessment (PSA) scales, Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scales (SBSES), Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) scores, and Visual Analog Scar (VAS) scales (the p values were 0.008, 0.007, 0.017, and 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSION: The multimodality scar program is more effective for scar prevention than the standard scar program. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Subject(s)
Cicatrix , Surgical Wound , Cicatrix/prevention & control , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The free flap surgical method is useful for the reconstruction of head and neck defects. This study retrospectively analyzed the results of head and neck reconstructions using various types of free flaps over the past 30 years. METHODS: Between 1989 and 2018, a total of 866 free flap procedures were performed on 859 patients with head and neck defects, including 7 double free flaps. The causes of vascular crisis and salvage rate were analyzed, and the total flap survival rate calculated among these patients. Additionally, the survival and complication rates for each flap type were compared. RESULTS: The 866 cases included 557 radial forearm flaps, 200 anterolateral thigh flaps, 39 fibular osteocutaneous flaps, and 70 of various other flaps. The incidence of the vascular crisis was 5.1%; its most common cause was venous thrombosis (52.3%). Salvage surgery was successful in 52.3% of patients, and the total flap survival rate was 97.6%. The success rate of the radial forearm flap was higher than of the anterolateral flap (p< 0.01), and the primary sites of malignancy were the tongue, tonsils, and hypopharynx, respectively. CONCLUSION: The free flap technique is the most reliable method for head and neck reconstruction; however, the radial forearm free flap showed the highest success rate (98.9%). In patients with malignancy, flap failure was more common in the anterolateral thigh (5.5%) and fibular (5.1%) flaps.
