Use of injectables in rhinoplasty retouching: towards an evolution of surgical strategy? Literature review.

Background:Surgical revision rate of rhinoplasty is from 5% to 15% in literature. The aims of our study were to define the rate and the predictive factors for surgical revision of rhinoplasty.Methods:We have realized a single-center case/control study including 62 patients who underwent surgical revision among 732 patients who underwent closed rhinoplasty between 2005 and 2015. Data of each rhinoplasty were collected from medical records and photographs. Statistical analyses were used.Results:The surgical revision rate was 8.6%. After multivariate analysis, 4 factors were statistically significant and independently associated with surgical revision: “preexisting respiratory functional disorder” [odds ratio OR = 3.30; 95% CI (1.47–7.76); P = 0.004], “wide nasal bone and side walls” [OR = 3.94; 95% CI (1.49–11.25); P = 0.007], “deviated nasal bone and side walls” [OR = 2.68; 95% CI [1.14–6.58]; P = 0.02] and the use of camouflage grafts [OR = 0.26; 95% CI [0.07–0.89]; P = 0.04].Conclusions:Closed rhinoplasties have similar revision rate to open techniques. Revision surgeries are justified by functional or aesthetic disorders. The interests of this study are to better inform patients and to adapt operative management. We provide here some recommendations with focus on the keys to successful rhinoplasty surgery.

Induction TPF regimen is a standard treatment option for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the oropharynx. The efficacy and safety of adding cetuximab to induction TPF (ETPF) therapy was evaluated. Patients with nonmetastatic resectable stage III/IV SCC of the oropharynx were treated with weekly cetuximab followed the same day by docetaxel and cisplatin and by a continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil on days 1-5 (every 3 weeks, 3 cycles). The primary endpoint was clinical and radiological complete response (crCR) of primary tumor at 3 months. Secondary endpoints were crCR rates, overall response, pathological CR, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. Forty-two patients were enrolled, and 41 received ETPF. The all nine planned cetuximab doses and the full three doses of planned chemotherapy were completed in 31 (76%) and 36 (88%) patients, respectively. Twelve (29%) patients required dose reduction. The crCR of primary tumor at the completion of therapy was observed in nine (22%) patients. ETPF was associated with a tumor objective response rate (ORR) of 58%. The most frequent grade 3–4 toxicities were as follows: nonfebrile neutropenia (39%), febrile neutropenia (19%), diarrhea (10%), and stomatitis (12%). Eighteen (44%) patients experienced acne-like skin reactions of any grade. One toxic death occurred secondary to chemotherapy-induced colitis with colonic perforation. This phase II study reports an interesting response rate for ETPF in patients with moderately advanced SCC of the oropharynx. The schedule of ETPF evaluated in this study cannot be recommended at this dosage.

No abstract

No abstract