BACKGROUND: Submental intubation performed using the classical Altemir’s technique is a well-accepted, safe technique for providing optimal operating field to the maxillofacial surgeon, in cases where either nasotracheal or orotracheal intubation is impossible. We propose a new, percutaneous Seldinger’s technique of submental intubation as an interesting alternative to the classical Altemir’s technique, wherein a percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy kit is used to dilate the submental tract, instead of bluntly dissecting it. We hypothesized that Seldinger’s technique would be associated with reduced procedure time and minimal scar formation in patients with maxillofacial fractures. METHODS: We enrolled 60 patients scheduled to undergo maxillofacial injury fixation under general anesthesia. After consent, the cohort was randomly allocated to undergo submental intubation by either the classical Altemir’s technique or Seldinger’s technique. As our primary objective, we noted the time taken to complete the procedure of submental intubation. Our secondary objectives were the components of primary outcome, such as disconnection/apnea time, bleeding, and technical difficulties during the procedure. We also observed for complications such as presence of salivary fistula/infection at hospital discharge and scar characteristics at 1- and 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: The median time for performing submental intubation in the Seldinger group was significantly lower than that in the Altemir group (170.5 [136.5–256.0] seconds vs 220.0 [205.5–289.0] seconds; P value, .040). The median disconnection time was also significantly lower in the Seldinger group (12.0 [10.8–20.0] seconds vs 19.0 [15.0–23.0] seconds; P value, .036). Furthermore, significant bleeding was absent in nearly 53.8% of the study participants in the Seldinger group as compared to 25.9% in the Altemir group. At follow-up, there was no evidence of differences in scar characteristics between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Seldinger’s technique is associated with shorter procedure time and reduced apnea time due to easier and better tract formation, thus minimizing the effort required to exteriorize the endotracheal tube. Furthermore, as dilation reduces tissue damage, Seldinger’s technique is associated with significantly less procedural bleeding. Thus, Seldinger’s technique can be safe, easy, and faster to perform compared with the classical Altemir’s technique of submental intubation in patients with maxillofacial trauma.
Background Breast augmentation is one the most commonly performed aesthetic surgical procedure, yet there has been no consensus on the use of drains. While some surgeons believe in using them due to fear of complications or because they were taught in a conventional manner, the authors present their experience of performing breast surgery without the use of drains. Objectives To study whether performing breast augmentation without the use of drains is safe. Methods Anthropometric details and complications of all the consecutive primary breast augmentation patients performed by a single surgeon from 2009 to 2022 were collected and analyzed. In none of these patients were drains used. Results A total of 429 (21%) patients were lost to follow-up and only those 1617 patients with a minimum follow-up of six months were included in this study. The mean age of the study group was 29.8 years with a mean BMI of 24.68. Mean follow-up was 16.24 months. Hematoma occurred in 15 patients (0.92%), seroma in 12 (0.74%), explantation due to infection in 3 patients (0.18%) and capsular contracture in 44 patients (2.72%). All these complications were in the lower range of complications of breast augmentation reported in the literature. Conclusions Unwarranted use of drains in breast augmentation should be avoided as it does not seemingly prevent the complications of breast augmentation surgery. Instead, it may increase the chances of infection, pain, and discomfort, and prolong the antibiotic coverage, and hence putting an additional overall financial burden on the patient.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.