Ophthalmic plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2017
Comparison of Colorado Microdissection Needle Versus Scalpel Incision for Aesthetic Upper and Lower Eyelid Blepharoplasty.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Arat Yonca O, Sezenoz Almila S, Bernardini Francesco P, Alford Mark A, Tepeoglu Merih, Allen Richard C
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Traditionally, eyelid skin incisions with electro-cautery devices have been avoided due to the concerns of aesthetically unacceptable scar formation. The purpose of this study is to compare ecchymosis, cosmesis, and histologic tissue damage of incisions made with a scalpel or Colorado needle in patients undergoing upper and lower aesthetic blepharoplasty. To the best of authors' knowledge, no previous study has been performed before to compare these 2 modalities in aesthetic blepharoplasty surgery.
METHODS: This is a multicenter, prospective, interventional, comparative case series. The study protocol was approved by Institutional Review Board in each institution. Patients underwent bilateral upper and/or transcutaneous lower blepharoplasty with 1 side randomly selected for skin incision with the scalpel, the other side with the Colorado needle. Ecchymosis was evaluated using a 10-point Likert scale and the wounds using a Hollander score. The margins of excised tissues were evaluated histologically.
RESULTS: A total of 254 eyelids of 101 patients were included in the study. No significant difference was observed in ecchymosis on postoperative day 1 and 7 and scar cosmesis on day 30 and 180 between the 2 techniques. Histologically, necrosis was noted only with the Colorado needle sides (p = 0.001). No adverse events occurred on the Colorado needle side at any time after surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: No clinical difference is noted between Colorado needle and scalpel incisions in terms of ecchymosis and scar cosmesis after aesthetic blepharoplasty.
METHODS: This is a multicenter, prospective, interventional, comparative case series. The study protocol was approved by Institutional Review Board in each institution. Patients underwent bilateral upper and/or transcutaneous lower blepharoplasty with 1 side randomly selected for skin incision with the scalpel, the other side with the Colorado needle. Ecchymosis was evaluated using a 10-point Likert scale and the wounds using a Hollander score. The margins of excised tissues were evaluated histologically.
RESULTS: A total of 254 eyelids of 101 patients were included in the study. No significant difference was observed in ecchymosis on postoperative day 1 and 7 and scar cosmesis on day 30 and 180 between the 2 techniques. Histologically, necrosis was noted only with the Colorado needle sides (p = 0.001). No adverse events occurred on the Colorado needle side at any time after surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: No clinical difference is noted between Colorado needle and scalpel incisions in terms of ecchymosis and scar cosmesis after aesthetic blepharoplasty.