Plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2020
Primary Rhinoplasty Does Not Interfere with Nasal Growth: A Long-Term Three-Dimensional Morphometric Outcome Study in Patients with Unilateral Cleft.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Seo Hyung Joon, Denadai Rafael, Vamvanij Natthacha, Chinpaisarn Chatchawarn, Lo Lun-Jou
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Primary rhinoplasty has not been universally adopted because the potential for nasal growth impairment remains an unsolved issue in cleft care. This study's purpose was to assess the long-term effects of primary rhinoplasty performed by a single surgeon in a cohort of patients with a unilateral cleft lip nose deformity.
METHODS: Three-dimensional nasal morphometric measurements (linear, angular, proportional, surface area, and volume) were collected from consecutive patients (cleft group, n = 52; mean age, 19 ± 1 year) who had undergone primary rhinoplasty with the use of the Noordhoff approach between 1995 and 2002 and reached skeletal maturity. Normal age-, sex-, and ethnicity-matched subjects (control group, n = 52) were identified for comparative analyses.
RESULTS: No significant differences (all p > 0.05) were observed for most measures, including nasal height, alar width, nasal dorsum angle, columellar angle, columellar-labial angle, nasal tip/height ratio, nasal index, alar width/intercanthal distance ratio, nasal surface area, and nasal volume. The cleft group displayed significantly (all p < 0.05) lower nasal bridge length and nasal tip projection, and greater nasal protrusion, tip/midline deviation, nasal tip angle, nasal tip protrusion width index, and alar width/mouth ratio values than the control group.
CONCLUSIONS: Primary rhinoplasty does not interfere with nasal growth as measured by three-dimensional photogrammetric analysis. Further imaging studies are required for the assessment of development in other anatomical nasal structures.
CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.
METHODS: Three-dimensional nasal morphometric measurements (linear, angular, proportional, surface area, and volume) were collected from consecutive patients (cleft group, n = 52; mean age, 19 ± 1 year) who had undergone primary rhinoplasty with the use of the Noordhoff approach between 1995 and 2002 and reached skeletal maturity. Normal age-, sex-, and ethnicity-matched subjects (control group, n = 52) were identified for comparative analyses.
RESULTS: No significant differences (all p > 0.05) were observed for most measures, including nasal height, alar width, nasal dorsum angle, columellar angle, columellar-labial angle, nasal tip/height ratio, nasal index, alar width/intercanthal distance ratio, nasal surface area, and nasal volume. The cleft group displayed significantly (all p < 0.05) lower nasal bridge length and nasal tip projection, and greater nasal protrusion, tip/midline deviation, nasal tip angle, nasal tip protrusion width index, and alar width/mouth ratio values than the control group.
CONCLUSIONS: Primary rhinoplasty does not interfere with nasal growth as measured by three-dimensional photogrammetric analysis. Further imaging studies are required for the assessment of development in other anatomical nasal structures.
CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.