The Laryngoscope · 2022
The Impact of Component Dorsal Hump Reduction on Patient-Perceived Nasal Aesthetics and Obstruction in Rhinoplasty.
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.
Burks Ciersten A, Weitzman Rachel E, Lindsay Robin W
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate functional and aesthetic patient-reported outcomes using validated metrics after component dorsal hump reduction (DHR) with spreader graft placement, which have not been previously reported.
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.
METHODS: This prospective cohort study was conducted in a tertiary care medical center. Participants underwent septorhinoplasty (SRP) with spreader graft placement with cosmetic, component DHR (cosmetic DHR), or SRP with spreader graft placement without dorsal hump reduction (noncosmetic, non-DHR). The Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scale and the FACE-Q Satisfaction with Nose, Nostrils, and Social Functioning scales were administered to patients preoperatively and postoperatively (at 2, 4, 6, and/or 12 months). Pre- and postoperative NOSE and FACE-Q scores were compared.
RESULTS: A total of 226 patients underwent SRP with spreader graft placement; 113 (50.0%) with cosmetic DHR and 113 (50.0%) noncosmetic, non-DHR (control). Patients who completed the NOSE and FACE-Q surveys preoperatively and at least at one postoperative time point were included. Both cohorts had a statistically and clinically significant improvement in NOSE and FACE-Q scores. There were similar improvements in NOSE scores in both cohorts. Postoperative FACE-Q scores were higher in the cosmetic DHR cohort despite lower preoperative FACE-Q scores when compared to the control cohort.
CONCLUSIONS: Although there are multiple techniques for DHR, component DHR with spreader graft placement has long been considered the standard. Therefore, it is important to note the significant postoperative cosmetic and functional improvements reported by patients who have undergone this procedure to compare to newer techniques as they evolve.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 132:2157-2161, 2022.
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.
METHODS: This prospective cohort study was conducted in a tertiary care medical center. Participants underwent septorhinoplasty (SRP) with spreader graft placement with cosmetic, component DHR (cosmetic DHR), or SRP with spreader graft placement without dorsal hump reduction (noncosmetic, non-DHR). The Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scale and the FACE-Q Satisfaction with Nose, Nostrils, and Social Functioning scales were administered to patients preoperatively and postoperatively (at 2, 4, 6, and/or 12 months). Pre- and postoperative NOSE and FACE-Q scores were compared.
RESULTS: A total of 226 patients underwent SRP with spreader graft placement; 113 (50.0%) with cosmetic DHR and 113 (50.0%) noncosmetic, non-DHR (control). Patients who completed the NOSE and FACE-Q surveys preoperatively and at least at one postoperative time point were included. Both cohorts had a statistically and clinically significant improvement in NOSE and FACE-Q scores. There were similar improvements in NOSE scores in both cohorts. Postoperative FACE-Q scores were higher in the cosmetic DHR cohort despite lower preoperative FACE-Q scores when compared to the control cohort.
CONCLUSIONS: Although there are multiple techniques for DHR, component DHR with spreader graft placement has long been considered the standard. Therefore, it is important to note the significant postoperative cosmetic and functional improvements reported by patients who have undergone this procedure to compare to newer techniques as they evolve.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 132:2157-2161, 2022.