Plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2022
Efficacy of Postsurgical Nostril Retainer in Patients with Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Treated with Presurgical Nasoalveolar Molding and Primary Cheiloplasty-Rhinoplasty.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Al-Qatami Fawzi, Avinoam Shayna P, Cutting Court B, Grayson Barry H, Shetye Pradip R
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The aim of this investigation was to determine whether the nasal form of patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate treated with presurgical nasoalveolar molding therapy, primary lip-nose surgery, and postsurgical nostril retainer was different from that of patients treated with presurgical nasoalveolar molding and primary lip and nose surgery alone.
METHODS: This cross-sectional, retrospective review focused on 50 consecutive patients with nonsyndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate: 24 treated with nasoalveolar molding and primary lip and nose surgery followed by postsurgical nostril retainer (group 1) compared with 26 patients treated with nasoalveolar molding and primary lip and nose surgery without postsurgical nostril retainer (group 2). Polyvinyl siloxane nasal impressions were performed at an average age of 12 months and 6 days. Bilateral measurements of alar width at maximum convexity, total alar base width, nasal tip projection, columella length, and nostril aperture width and height were recorded. Statistical comparisons of cleft-side versus noncleft side nasal measurements were performed within group 1 and group 2, as well as comparisons of differences between the two groups.
RESULTS: Cleft-side nasal dimension was statistically significantly better in group 1 than in group 2 across all measures except nasal projection ( p < 0.05). Group 1 showed less difference between the cleft side and noncleft side in all six measurements than did group 2 ( p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant difference in the nasal shape of patients who used a postsurgical nostril retainer compared with those who did not. Patients who used a postsurgical nostril retainer showed better nasal shape at an average age of 12 months compared with the control group.
CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.
METHODS: This cross-sectional, retrospective review focused on 50 consecutive patients with nonsyndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate: 24 treated with nasoalveolar molding and primary lip and nose surgery followed by postsurgical nostril retainer (group 1) compared with 26 patients treated with nasoalveolar molding and primary lip and nose surgery without postsurgical nostril retainer (group 2). Polyvinyl siloxane nasal impressions were performed at an average age of 12 months and 6 days. Bilateral measurements of alar width at maximum convexity, total alar base width, nasal tip projection, columella length, and nostril aperture width and height were recorded. Statistical comparisons of cleft-side versus noncleft side nasal measurements were performed within group 1 and group 2, as well as comparisons of differences between the two groups.
RESULTS: Cleft-side nasal dimension was statistically significantly better in group 1 than in group 2 across all measures except nasal projection ( p < 0.05). Group 1 showed less difference between the cleft side and noncleft side in all six measurements than did group 2 ( p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant difference in the nasal shape of patients who used a postsurgical nostril retainer compared with those who did not. Patients who used a postsurgical nostril retainer showed better nasal shape at an average age of 12 months compared with the control group.
CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.