Functional and Aesthetic Outcomes of Let Down Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty.

Background: Preservation rhinoplasty is a re-emerging technique that lacks data on functional and aesthetic outcomes. Objective: To measure the change in patient-reported nasal aesthetic perception, nasal breathing, and sleep and compare outcomes between two different septal cartilage manipulation techniques among patients undergoing preservation rhinoplasty. Methods: Functional and aesthetic outcomes of a let down dorsal preservation rhinoplasty using either the modified subdorsal strip method (MSSM) or subdorsal Z-flap are assessed pre- and postoperatively using the validated assessment tools Nose Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE), Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22), Standardized Cosmesis and Health Nasal Outcomes Survey (SCHNOS), and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS). Results: Fifty-two patients, 40 women and 12 men ages 15-69 years, underwent dorsal preservation rhinoplasty and the majority reported at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively significant improvement based on a paired t-test in NOSE, SNOT-22, SCHNOS, and ESS scores except for ESS scores at 6 and 12 months. No significant difference based on a two-sample t-test was observed between the MSSM and Z-flap techniques implemented. Conclusion: Let down dorsal preservation rhinoplasty with either the MSSM or Z-flap cartilage manipulation technique can achieve significant improvement in nasal aesthetics, nasal breathing, and sleep according to patient responses on validated assessment tools.

Outcomes of tracheoesophageal puncture in twice-radiated patients.

OBJECTIVE: Previous research has demonstrated the safety of tracheoesophageal puncture voice prosthesis (TEP) placement in radiated patients; however, there is a growing population of twice-radiated patients with limited research on the outcomes of TEP-placement in this cohort. METHODS: After Institutional Review Board approval, a retrospective review of 80 patients that underwent TEP from 2006 to 2017 at a single institution was conducted, of which 16 patients underwent two courses of radiation. Outcome measures include TEP removal, complication and duration of usage. RESULTS: Half of twice-radiated patients had ultimate removal of their voice prosthesis with removal occurring at a median of 24.9 months after placement. Reasons for prosthesis removal included widening tracheoesophageal fistula, local recurrence, and dysphagia/esophageal stenosis. Nearly one-third of these patients required surgical intervention for closure of a widening fistula. In contrast, only 17% of once-radiated patients had their prosthesis removed with removal occurring at a median of 28.1 months. This was statistically fewer than the twice-radiated group (p = 0.02). Reasons for removal included patient preference, persistent leakage, recurrence of disease, enlarging tracheoesophageal fistula, poor voice, and dysphagia. Eleven percent of once-radiated patients required surgical intervention for TEP-related complications (p = 0.057). CONCLUSION: In the twice-radiated patient cohort, there is a higher rate of TEP removal and need for surgical intervention for a voice prosthesis-related complication as compared to a once-radiated cohort.