The Journal of craniofacial surgery · 2020
Bilateral Versus Unilateral Cranialization in the Management of a Breached Frontal Sinus.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Belzberg Micah, Shalom Netanel Ben, Wolff Amir, Huang Judy, Gordon Chad
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Frontal sinus breach during craniotomy may occur inadvertently or intentionally. Management of a breached frontal sinus is controversial as numerous operative techniques have been described. Frontal sinus breach may result in life-threatening complications, require additional surgeries, and increase the risk for long-term infectious sequelae. A literature review found a paucity of neurosurgical reports examining breached frontal sinus management or specific analyses of unilateral versus bilateral frontal sinus cranialization.
OBJECTIVE: A frontal sinus cranialization technique employed for patients involving frontal sinus breach and analyze outcomes managed with bilateral versus unilateral cranialization was presented in this study.
METHODS: A retrospective review of outcomes was performed using our Institutional Review Board-approved surgical case database between September 2012 and September 2018.
RESULTS: Thirty-three frontal sinus cranializations following frontal sinus breach were identified. Average follow-up time was 25 months. A statistically significant difference in postoperative infections was observed in patients with a history of previous cranial surgery who underwent unilateral compared to bilateral frontal sinus cranialization.
CONCLUSION: These results suggest surgeons performing craniotomy or consulted intraoperatively for suspected frontal sinus breach should have a high suspicion for breached frontal sinus and a low threshold for frontal sinus cranialization. Furthermore, when performing frontal sinus cranialization, surgeons should consider performing bilateral, instead of unilateral, cranialization in patients with a history of previous craniotomy as bilateral cranialization was shown to decrease the risk of postoperative infection.
OBJECTIVE: A frontal sinus cranialization technique employed for patients involving frontal sinus breach and analyze outcomes managed with bilateral versus unilateral cranialization was presented in this study.
METHODS: A retrospective review of outcomes was performed using our Institutional Review Board-approved surgical case database between September 2012 and September 2018.
RESULTS: Thirty-three frontal sinus cranializations following frontal sinus breach were identified. Average follow-up time was 25 months. A statistically significant difference in postoperative infections was observed in patients with a history of previous cranial surgery who underwent unilateral compared to bilateral frontal sinus cranialization.
CONCLUSION: These results suggest surgeons performing craniotomy or consulted intraoperatively for suspected frontal sinus breach should have a high suspicion for breached frontal sinus and a low threshold for frontal sinus cranialization. Furthermore, when performing frontal sinus cranialization, surgeons should consider performing bilateral, instead of unilateral, cranialization in patients with a history of previous craniotomy as bilateral cranialization was shown to decrease the risk of postoperative infection.