Annales de chirurgie plastique et esthetique · 2019
Effectiveness and safety comparison of three eye and orbital reconstruction techniques in facial plastic surgery.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Keilani C, Baus A, Tick S, Sahel J-A, Boumendil J
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness and the safety of three eye reconstruction techniques with porous bioceramic implantation in facial surgery: the "four petals" eye evisceration (EE) technique, the "russian doll" EE technique and the enucleation with "on-the-table" evisceration technique.
METHODS: Retrospective review of patients who underwent surgical orbit reconstruction with primary placement of a porous bioceramic orbital implant using three techniques at Quinze-Vingts National Center (Paris, France). We compared outcomes of three surgical orbit reconstruction techniques: the "four petal" EE technique, the "russian doll" EE technique and the enucleation with "on-the-table" evisceration technique. The primary endpoint was to determine the rate of implant exposure and the facial cosmetic result during the first year after surgery for each technique. The mean of the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NRS) after surgery at day 1 was also a primary endpoint. In addition, data such as analgesic intake and rate of revision surgery were compared for each technique.
RESULTS: One hundred and ten patients were included: 70 patients in the "four petals" procedure group, 31 in the "on-the-table" procedure group and 9 in the "russian doll" procedure group. NRS pain at day 1 was statistically significantly lower in the "four petals" procedure group 0.9 [standard deviation (SD)] (1.8) and in the "russian doll" procedure group 1 (1.7) than in the "on-the-table" procedure group 2.5 (2.4) (P=0.001). Implant exposure was statistically significantly lower in the "four petals" procedure group (2.9%) and in the "on-the-table" procedure group (3.2%) when compared to the "russian doll" procedure group (22.2%) (P=0.03). Rate of revision surgery was lower in the "four petals" procedure group (11.5%) than in the "russian doll" procedure group (33.3%) and the "on-the-table" procedure group (22.6%). "russian doll" evisceration procedure group had the highest orbital lipofilling rate due to the highest rate of enophthalmos. Therefore, the cosmetic result was better in the "four petals" and the "on-the-table" procedure group.
CONCLUSION: The "four petals" EE technique for surgical eye and orbital reconstruction seems to be a method that reduce implant extrusion, postoperative pain and improve facial esthetic result.
METHODS: Retrospective review of patients who underwent surgical orbit reconstruction with primary placement of a porous bioceramic orbital implant using three techniques at Quinze-Vingts National Center (Paris, France). We compared outcomes of three surgical orbit reconstruction techniques: the "four petal" EE technique, the "russian doll" EE technique and the enucleation with "on-the-table" evisceration technique. The primary endpoint was to determine the rate of implant exposure and the facial cosmetic result during the first year after surgery for each technique. The mean of the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NRS) after surgery at day 1 was also a primary endpoint. In addition, data such as analgesic intake and rate of revision surgery were compared for each technique.
RESULTS: One hundred and ten patients were included: 70 patients in the "four petals" procedure group, 31 in the "on-the-table" procedure group and 9 in the "russian doll" procedure group. NRS pain at day 1 was statistically significantly lower in the "four petals" procedure group 0.9 [standard deviation (SD)] (1.8) and in the "russian doll" procedure group 1 (1.7) than in the "on-the-table" procedure group 2.5 (2.4) (P=0.001). Implant exposure was statistically significantly lower in the "four petals" procedure group (2.9%) and in the "on-the-table" procedure group (3.2%) when compared to the "russian doll" procedure group (22.2%) (P=0.03). Rate of revision surgery was lower in the "four petals" procedure group (11.5%) than in the "russian doll" procedure group (33.3%) and the "on-the-table" procedure group (22.6%). "russian doll" evisceration procedure group had the highest orbital lipofilling rate due to the highest rate of enophthalmos. Therefore, the cosmetic result was better in the "four petals" and the "on-the-table" procedure group.
CONCLUSION: The "four petals" EE technique for surgical eye and orbital reconstruction seems to be a method that reduce implant extrusion, postoperative pain and improve facial esthetic result.