Search

Objective: To evaluate the effect of prophylactic antibiotics on outcomes and complications following surgical reconstructions of nasal Mohs defects in the outpatient setting. Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Single tertiary care center, July 2021 to June 2023. Methods: All adult patients who underwent reconstruction of nasal Mohs defects in an outpatient office setting were examined. Patient demographics, surgical details, prophylactic postprocedural antibiotic use, and postprocedural complications (infection, flap or graft necrosis, wound dehiscence) were collected. Outcomes and complications were compared between patients who received and did not receive prophylactic antibiotics using χ2, Kruskal‐Wallis, and multivariable logistic regression. Results: A total of 211 patients met inclusion criteria. A majority of reconstructions utilized a local flap (70%), followed by a skin or composite graft (22%), then an interpolated flap (8%). Over half of patients (55%) were prescribed prophylactic antibiotics. Postprocedural complications were documented in 16 patients (7.6%), including infection (3.3%) and flap or graft loss or necrosis (1.4%). The rate of complications did not differ based on receipt of antibiotics. The only factors independently associated with the development of complications were history of chemoradiation and reconstruction with skin or composite grafts. Conclusion: Prophylactic antibiotics after nasal Mohs reconstructions performed in the office setting were not associated with any differences in the rate of postprocedural complications, including surgical site infections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Microtia and anotia repair require techniques that consider both aesthetics and function. The outcomes of different reconstructive frameworks such as costal cartilage or a porous polyethylene implant have not been evaluated on a national scale. We aim to understand differences in outcomes/complication rates and operative times between different reconstructive frameworks used in microtia/anotia reconstruction. Methods: This was a retrospective review of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Pediatric database between 2012–2019. Patients with ICD‐9/10 codes for microtia/anotia were isolated. Reconstruction methods were identified using CPT codes for rib graft, ear cartilage graft, and alloplastic implants (biocompatible implants, porous polyethylene, etc). Outcomes included operative‐time, wound complications, and unplanned re‐operations within 30 days of surgery. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to control for confounders. Results: We included 593 patients for analysis. Reconstruction with rib grafts (N = 506, 85%) was the most common. In 58 patients (9.8%), an implant was used for the auricular framework, whereas in 47 (7.9%) ear cartilage grafts were used. The overall wound complication rate was 3.4%. On univariate analysis, alloplastic implants exhibited a higher rate of wound complications (8.6% vs. 2.8%, p = 0.037) and longer operative times (350 min vs. 235 min, p < 0.001). After controlling for demographics and comorbidities, implants conferred an independently increased risk of wound complications (OR 3.52, 1.10–9.54, p = 0.020). Conclusion: Although the use of alloplastic implants (e.g., porous polyethylene) may confer an increased risk of early complications, the long‐term clinical implications of these findings are unclear relative to aesthetic benefits. Multi‐institutional studies are needed to validate these findings using patient‐specific and surgeon‐specific data. Level of Evidence: 3 Laryngoscope, 134:1214–1219, 2024 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Surgical management of cleft lip/palate and cleft rhinoplasty have historically been performed by plastic surgeons. No study has addressed temporal trends in cleft‐associated surgeries. This study assesses trends in cleft surgical management and complications in a national database. Methods: Cross‐sectional analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Pediatric database from 2012 to 2021. Patients receiving cleft lip and/or palate repair were isolated using CPT codes. A subset receiving cleft rhinoplasty was also analyzed. The yearly proportion of otolaryngologists compared to general plastic surgeons performing surgeries was noted. Regression analysis was used to identify trends and predictors of management by OHNS. Results: We identified 46,618 cases of cleft repair, of which 15.6% (N = 7,255) underwent repair with otolaryngology. On univariate Pearson correlation analysis, neither cleft rhinoplasties performed by OHNS over time (R = 0.371, 95% CI −0.337 to 0.811, p = 0.2907) nor all cases (R = −0.26, −0.76 to 0.44, p = 0.465) exhibited a significant change. On multivariable regression, the operative year was not associated with being treated by otolaryngology (p = 0.826) for all cleft cases but was associated with such in cleft rhinoplasties (OR 1.04, 1.01–1.08, p = 0.024). On multivariable analysis, the operative year was correlated with a higher rate of complications overall (OR 1.04, 1.01–1.07, p = 0.002). Surgeon specialty was not associated with complication rates. Conclusions: In the last 10 years, no change in the proportion of cleft lip/palate repair performed by OHNS was observed. Otolaryngologists are performing more cleft rhinoplasty but at a marginal rate. Otolaryngologists also manage more complex patients with multiple comorbidities compared to their colleagues. Complication rates have increased overall regardless of surgeon specialty, warranting further investigation. Level of Evidence: 3 Laryngoscope, 134:671–677, 2024 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Preservation of native nasal structures in rhinoplasty has aesthetic and functional benefits. This ideology can be implemented within open surgical approaches and in the context of structural modifications of the nose, particularly the nasal tip (structural preservation). In addition, modifications of preservation techniques and hybrid approaches to the osseocartilaginous vault have resulted in expanded indications for preservation of the nasal dorsum. These modifications and indications, as well as septal management in preservation cases, are discussed here in the context of an open approach. Importantly, patient-reported measures suggest that both preservation and structural approaches can yield excellent outcomes. An understanding and integration of both techniques offer great versatility for the rhinoplasty surgeon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This review provides a comprehensive presentation of the evidence available in facial reconstruction post-Mohs micrographic surgery. Given the large diversity in post-Mohs reconstruction, there are limited guidelines in the management of defects. The aim of the present work is to provide a review of the best evidence as it pertains to several considerations in facial reconstruction. Data suggests that Mohs micrographic surgery and many reconstructive procedures can be performed as outpatient procedures under local anesthesia, with narcotic pain medication only given in certain patient populations following a minority of reconstructive procedures. Perioperative and topical antibiotics are generally not indicated. Aspirin and warfarin can generally be continued for most reconstructive procedures, but clopidogrel and novel anticoagulants may predispose to increased bleeding complications. Delayed reconstruction appears to be safe, although data are discordant on this topic. No specific wound closure technique or suture choice appears to be consistently superior. Given the lack of robust comparative studies, consistent methodology, and variable defect sizes/locations, no robust evidence-based guidelines can be generated for reconstruction techniques of facial subsites. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Structural preservation techniques (SPR) minimize disruption of the dorsal aesthetic lines, with potential aesthetic and functional benefits over conventional hump resection techniques (CHR). The goal of this study is to compare patient reported outcomes between these techniques. Methods: This study was a retrospective matched cohort analysis of patients undergoing rhinoplasty with dorsal hump reduction using patient-reported outcomes measures: Standardized Cosmesis and Health Nasal Outcomes Survey (obstructive: SCHNOS-O, cosmetic: SCHNOS-C) and visual analog scale (functional: VAS-F, cosmetic: VAS-C). A cohort of patients undergoing SPR were matched to a cohort undergoing CHR based on age, gender, and preoperative SCHNOS scores. Intraoperative techniques and patient-reported outcomes were compared between groups. Results: There were no significant differences in the dorsal height between groups. While radix grafting was more common in SPR, dorsal onlay grafting and midvault reconstructive techniques (e.g. autospreader flaps) were more common in CHR. Within both groups, post-operative SCHNOS and VAS improved significantly at short- and long-term follow-up. There were no differences between SCHNOS or VAS scores preoperatively. Post-operative SCHNOS-O and SCHNOS-C scores were similar between groups at both short-term and long-term follow-up. Post-operative VAS-F scores were not different; however, VAS-C scores at short-term follow-up were statistically greater in the SPR group compared to the CHR group (8.92 vs 8.20, p = 0.03). At long-term follow-up, the difference was not significant. Conclusion: While there are theoretical functional and aesthetic benefits of SPR techniques, the patient reported benefits may be minimal when compared to CHR techniques with appropriate midvault reconstruction. Level of Evidence III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]