JAMA facial plastic surgery最新文献

{"title":"Spontaneity Assessment in Dually Innervated Gracilis Smile Reanimation Surgery.","authors":"J. Dusseldorp, M. V. van Veen, D. Guarin, Olivia E. Quatela, Nate Jowett, T. Hadlock","doi":"10.1001/jamafacial.2019.1090","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.1090","url":null,"abstract":"Importance\u0000Surgeons have sought to optimize outcomes of smile reanimation surgery by combining inputs from nerve-to-masseter and cross-face nerve grafts. An objective assessment tool could help surgeons evaluate outcomes to determine the optimal neural sources for smile reanimation.\u0000\u0000\u0000Objective\u0000To evaluate the use of a novel video time-stamping method and standard outcome measurement tools to assess outcomes of facial reanimation surgery using various innervation strategies.\u0000\u0000\u0000Design, Setting, and Participants\u0000Cohort study assessing the outcomes of dually innervated gracilis free muscle transfers vs single-source innervated gracilis transfer performed at a tertiary care facial nerve center between 2007 and 2017 using a novel, video time-stamping spontaneity assessment method. The statistical analyses were performed in 2018.\u0000\u0000\u0000Interventions\u0000Dually innervated gracilis free muscle transfers or single-source innervated gracilis transfer.\u0000\u0000\u0000Main Outcomes and Measures\u0000Spontaneous smiling was assessed by clinicians and quantified using blinded time-stamped video recordings of smiling elicited while viewing humorous video clips.\u0000\u0000\u0000Results\u0000This retrospective cohort study included 25 patients (12 men and 13 women; median [range] age, 38.4 [29.3-46.0] years) treated with dually innervated gracilis free functional muscle graft for unilateral facial palsy between 2007 and 2017. Smile spontaneity assessment was performed in 17 patients and was compared with assessment performed in 24 patients treated with single-source innervated gracilis transfer (ie, nerve-to-masseter-driven or cross-face nerve graft-driven gracilis [n = 13]) (demographic data not available for NTM and CFNG cohorts). The use of time-stamped video assessment revealed that spontaneous synchronous oral commissure movement in a median percentage of smiles was 33% in patients with dually innervated gracilis (interquartile range [IQR], 0%-71%), 20% of smiles in patients with nerve-to-masseter-driven gracilis (IQR, 0%-50%), and 75% of smiles in patients with cross-face nerve graft-driven gracilis (IQR, 0%-100%). Clinicians graded smile spontaneity in dually innervated cases as absent in 40% (n = 6 of 15), trace in 33% (n = 5 of 15) and present in 27% (n = 4 of 15). No association was demonstrated between clinician-reported spontaneity and objectively measured synchronicity.\u0000\u0000\u0000Conclusions and Relevance\u0000Dually innervated gracilis free muscle transfers may improve smile spontaneity compared with masseteric nerve-driven transfers but not to the level of cross-face nerve graft-driven gracilis transfers. Quantifying spontaneity is notoriously difficult, and most authors rely on clinical assessment. Our results suggest that clinicians may rate presence of spontaneity higher than objective measures, highlighting the importance of standardized assessment techniques.\u0000\u0000\u0000Level of Evidence\u00004.","PeriodicalId":14538,"journal":{"name":"JAMA facial plastic surgery","volume":"1 1","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.1090","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47645762","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Review of Facial Trauma Surgery: From Primary Repair to Reconstruction.","authors":"B. Pyfer, J. Marcus","doi":"10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0862","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0862","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14538,"journal":{"name":"JAMA facial plastic surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0862","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43451446","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Categorization and Analysis of Nasal Base Shapes Using a Parametric Model.","authors":"A. Zhukhovitskaya, Dalan Cragun, Erica Su, Christian H. Barnes, B. Wong","doi":"10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0483","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0483","url":null,"abstract":"Importance\u0000Nasal base view is important for rhinoplasty analysis. Although some descriptors of nasal base shape exist, they are largely subjective and qualitative.\u0000\u0000\u0000Objective\u0000To evaluate a parametric model of nasal base shape and compare it with categorization by surgeons to create an objective classification system for clinical evaluation and communication.\u0000\u0000\u0000Design, Setting, and Participants\u0000Retrospective cohort review of deidentified photographs of 420 patients evaluated for possible facial plastic surgery at a tertiary care academic medical center between January 2013 and June 2017. The nasal bases were classified into 6 shape categories (equilateral, boxy, cloverleaf, flat, round, and narrow) via visual inspection. The contour of each nasal base was traced using MATLAB software (MathWorks Inc). The software then performed a curve fit to the parametric model with output of values for 5 parameters: projection-to-width ratio, the anterior-posterior positioning of the tip bulk, symmetry, degree of lateral recurvature of the nasal base, and size. The differences among shape categories for each parameter were analyzed using 1-way analysis of variance. Pairwise comparisons were then performed to ascertain how the various shapes differed. Finally, a multinomial logistic regression model was used to predict nasal base shape using parameter values. Data were analyzed between April 2017 and January 2018.\u0000\u0000\u0000Main Outcomes and Measures\u0000An algorithm that categorized nasal base shapes into 6 categories.\u0000\u0000\u0000Results\u0000The 420 nasal base photographs of patients evaluated for possible plastic surgery were categorized into 1 of 6 categories; 305 photographs were readily classified, and the remaining 115 were termed unclassified and were categorized. For both the classified and unclassified nasal base groups, there were statistically significant differences between projection-to-width ratio (classified, F5,299 = 21.51; unclassified, F4,100 = 10.59; P < .001), the anterior-posterior positioning of the tip bulk (classified, F5,299 = 3.76; P = .003; unclassified, F4,110 = 4.54; P = .002), and degree of lateral recurvature of the nasal base (classified, F5,299 = 24.14; unclassified, F4,100 = 7.21; P < .001). A multinomial logistic regression model categorization was concordant with surgeon categorization in 201 of 305 (65.9%) cases of classified nasal bases and 38 of 115 (33.0%) unclassified nasal bases.\u0000\u0000\u0000Conclusions and Relevance\u0000The parametric model may provide an objective and numerical approach to analyzing nasal base shape.\u0000\u0000\u0000Level of Evidence\u0000NA.","PeriodicalId":14538,"journal":{"name":"JAMA facial plastic surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0483","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48088461","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Association of Perioperative Opioid-Sparing Multimodal Analgesia With Narcotic Use and Pain Control After Head and Neck Free Flap Reconstruction.","authors":"M. Eggerstedt, K. Stenson, E. Ramirez, Hannah N. Kuhar, Danny B. Jandali, Deborah Vaughan, S. Al-Khudari, R. Smith, Peter C. Revenaugh","doi":"10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0612","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0612","url":null,"abstract":"Importance\u0000An increase in narcotic prescription patterns has contributed to the current opioid epidemic in the United States. Opioid-sparing perioperative analgesia represents a means of mitigating the risk of opioid dependence while providing superior perioperative analgesia.\u0000\u0000\u0000Objective\u0000To assess whether multimodal analgesia (MMA) is associated with reduced narcotic use and improved pain control compared with traditional narcotic-based analgesics at discharge and in the immediate postoperative period after free flap reconstructive surgery.\u0000\u0000\u0000Design, Setting, and Participants\u0000This retrospective cohort study assessed a consecutive sample of 65 patients (28 MMA, 37 controls) undergoing free flap reconstruction of a through-and-through mucosal defect within the head and neck region at a tertiary academic referral center from June 1, 2017, to November 30, 2018. Patients and physicians were not blinded to the patients' analgesic regimen. Patients' clinical courses were followed up for 30 days postoperatively.\u0000\u0000\u0000Interventions\u0000Patients were administered a preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative analgesia regimen consisting of scheduled and as-needed neuromodulating and anti-inflammatory medications, with narcotic medications reserved for refractory cases. Control patients were administered traditional narcotic-based analgesics as needed.\u0000\u0000\u0000Main Outcomes and Measures\u0000Narcotic doses administered during the perioperative period and at discharge were converted to morphine-equivalent doses (MEDs) for comparison. Postoperative Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale pain scores (ranging from 0 [no pain] to 10 [worst pain imaginable]) were collected for the first 72 hours postoperatively as a patient-reported means of analyzing effectiveness of analgesia.\u0000\u0000\u0000Results\u0000A total of 28 patients (mean [SD] age, 64.1 [12.3] years; 17 [61%] male) were included in the MMA group and 37 (mean [SD] age, 65.0 [11.0] years; 22 [59%] male) in the control group. The number of MEDs administered postoperatively was 10.0 (interquartile range [IQR], 2.7-23.1) in the MMA cohort and 89.6 (IQR, 60.0-104.5) in the control cohort (P < .001). Mean (SD) Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale pain scores postoperatively were 2.05 (1.41) in the MMA cohort and 3.66 (1.99) in the control cohort (P = .001). Median number of MEDs prescribed at discharge were 0 (IQR, 0-18.8) in the MMA cohort and 300.0 (IQR, 262.5-412.5) in the control cohort (P < .001).\u0000\u0000\u0000Conclusions and Relevance\u0000The findings suggest that after free flap reconstruction, MMA is associated with reduced narcotic use at discharge and in the immediate postoperative period and with superior analgesia as measured by patient-reported pain scores. Patients receiving MMA achieved improved pain control, and the number of narcotic prescriptions in circulation were reduced.\u0000\u0000\u0000Level of Evidence\u00003.","PeriodicalId":14538,"journal":{"name":"JAMA facial plastic surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0612","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44140024","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Association of Pediatric Patient Demographic Factors and Scar Anatomic Features With Scar Outcomes After Surgical Repair of Cleft Lip.","authors":"A. Marston, M. S. Costello, Z. Farhood, K. A. Brandstetter, Alexander W. Murphey, S. Nguyen, C. Discolo, K. Patel","doi":"10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0669","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0669","url":null,"abstract":"Importance\u0000Scar outcomes following cleft lip repair are an important component of pediatric patient and family satisfaction and indicate the need for future surgical interventions.\u0000\u0000\u0000Objective\u0000To assess the association of pediatric patient demographic factors and scar anatomic features with scar outcomes following cleft lip surgical repair.\u0000\u0000\u0000Design, Setting, and Participants\u0000A case-control study was conducted involving 58 pediatric patients who underwent surgical repair of a cleft lip from October 31, 2008, to August 4, 2016, at a tertiary care pediatric specialty hospital. Data on patient demographic factors, cleft type, and the surgical technique used were collected and analyzed from June 11, 2009, to November 21, 2017. Scar outcomes were subjectively rated by 3 physicians at 6-month and 12-month postoperative intervals.\u0000\u0000\u0000Main Outcomes and Measures\u0000Overall scar outcomes at 6-month and 12-month postoperative intervals were based on rating of scar appearance, color, width, height, and alignment by using a subjective, 5-point scar-assessment scale in which 1 indicated the poorest aesthetic appearance and 5, the ideal aesthetic appearance.\u0000\u0000\u0000Results\u0000A total of 58 pediatric patients who underwent cleft lip repair were evaluated; mean (SD) age at time of repair, 4.8 (3.0) months. Of these, 44 (76%) were male and 14 (24%) were female, 37 (64%) were white, 11 (19%) were black, 7 (12%) were Hispanic, 2 (3%) were Asian, and 1 (2%) was of another race/ethnicity. Scores on the Cohen κ interrater test indicated either a substantial or almost perfect strength of agreement among the physicians grading the scar outcomes. At 12 months, patients with black skin type had worse overall scar outcomes than patients with white skin type (odds ratio [OR], -0.31; 95% CI, -1.15 to -0.14; P = .03). A depressed scar height (OR, -0.54; 95% CI, -1.32 to -0.49; P < .001), and hypopigmented scar color (OR, -0.45; 95% CI, -1.34 to -0.32; P = .002) were associated with worse scar outcomes at 12 months following surgery. The overall median lip scar outcome significantly improved between the 6-month and 12-month follow-up assessments (scar-assessment scale score, 3.3; interquartile range [IQR], 2.7-4.0 vs 4.0; IQR, 3.3-4.3; P < .001). No association was observed between the anatomic type and severity of the cleft lip and scar outcomes (unilateral vs bilateral cleft, complete vs incomplete or microform cleft, and lip height ratio of the unilateral noncleft to cleft lip).\u0000\u0000\u0000Conclusions and Relevance\u0000This study's findings suggest that, compared with white pediatric patients, black pediatric patients exhibited worse overall scar outcomes. A depressed scar and a hypopigmented scar also were associated with overall worse scar appearance after surgical repair. Cleft lip scar outcomes were not significantly associated with the type and severity of the cleft lip.","PeriodicalId":14538,"journal":{"name":"JAMA facial plastic surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0669","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41889550","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Review of Aesthetic Orthognathic Surgery and Rhinoplasty.","authors":"I. Papel","doi":"10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0579","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0579","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14538,"journal":{"name":"JAMA facial plastic surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0579","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43236021","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Confounding Factors on Postoperative Opioid Use Following Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.","authors":"Dominic V. Pisano","doi":"10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0757","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0757","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14538,"journal":{"name":"JAMA facial plastic surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0757","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42800733","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Confounding Factors on Postoperative Use Following Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery-Reply.","authors":"Emily A. Spataro, C. Olds, Sam P. Most","doi":"10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0761","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0761","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14538,"journal":{"name":"JAMA facial plastic surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0761","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46538953","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Error in the Introduction.","authors":"","doi":"10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0900","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0900","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14538,"journal":{"name":"JAMA facial plastic surgery","volume":"21 5 1","pages":"466"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0900","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45161782","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery.","authors":"","doi":"10.1001/jamafacial.2018.1345","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2018.1345","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14538,"journal":{"name":"JAMA facial plastic surgery","volume":"21 5 1","pages":"350"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1001/jamafacial.2018.1345","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41825648","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}