Outcome after Dorsal Hump Resection versus Hump Remodeling and Re-insertion: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Elemam, Amr; Dewidar, Hazem; Shawky, Ahmed M.; Elfouly, Mahmoud; Sabaa, Mohamed Abd Elmottaleb

doi:10.21608/ejentas.2022.118244.1465

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the present work, no significant variation was existed in complications among the studied groups. In agreement with our results, Elemam et al [28] showed that there were no surgical problems, such as epistaxis or severe nasal deformities, observed in any of the participants in either group. In the current work, a significant agreement was existed among the 3 raters in group B, there was a moderate agreement among rater 1 and 2, between rater 1 and 3 and among rater 2 and 3.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Parallel to our study, ElBestar et al [27] found that the spreader flap is a viable substitute for the spreader graft in reconstructing the nasal dorsum following a significant hump removal, yielding comparable beneficial outcomes in terms of both function and appearance. Elemam et al [28] discovered that individuals who received dorsal hump remodelling and reinsertion experienced a more significant reduction in the breadth of their nasal bones compared to those who only had hump excision without dorsal grafting. In the present work, surgical time was substantially increased in group A than group B (137 minutes in group A versus 110 minutes in group B) (p<0.001).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The value of virtual simulation for pre-operative planning in Rhinoplasty

Elghazaly,

Khedr,

Mahmoud

et al. 2024

Int. J. Surg. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Rhinoplasty is widely recognized as one of the most difficult procedures in plastic surgeries, two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) digital imaging have played an important role in this field, being as a valuable tool throughout preoperative and intraoperative analysis to evaluate the use and efficacy of preoperative 3D virtual simulation and surgical planning in rhinoplasty. Methods: This prospective randomised clinical work was performed on 30 patients with external nasal deformities of dorsum with or without tip deformities as dorsal hump, Nasal tip jobs, posttraumatic deformities. Participants had been subdivided into two groups equally: Group A: Conventional-procedure rhinoplasty and group B: Rhinoplasty with preoperative 3D-simulation. All patients were subjected to software CT scanners (giving the comprehensive 3-D digital visualization for the anatomy of the head and neck of the patient). Results: Rhinoplasty outcome evaluation (ROE) questionnaire demonstrated that participants who had been satisfied with the look of their nose as well as the aesthetic score were significantly higher in group B. Surgical time had been significantly increased in group A. There was a significant agreement between the 3 raters in group B and no significant variation was existed among both groups as regard to complications, the average objective evaluation of the rhinoplasty, breathing from nose and functional score between the studied groups. Conclusions: In rhinoplasty, virtual simulation using 3D technology and 3D printed anatomic surgical guide showed better promising results regarding surgical time, ROE and patients' satisfaction with more reliable results compared to conventional methods. Virtual simulation assists in harmonizing the aesthetic objectives of the patient and surgeon.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The value of virtual simulation for pre-operative planning in Rhinoplasty

Elghazaly,

Khedr,

Mahmoud

et al. 2024

Int. J. Surg. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Dorsal Preservation versus Component Dorsal Hump Reduction Rhinoplasty: An Assessment of Patient-reported Outcomes

Foppiani,

Joy,

Hernandez Alvarez

et al. 2024

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery - Global Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The literature on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) discussing dorsal preservation rhinoplasty (DPR) and component dorsal hump reduction (CDHR) is scarce. This study aims to fill the gap in PROs between these techniques. Methods: A systematic review was conducted to investigate PROs of DPR and CDHR. A proportion meta-analysis was conducted using Stata statistical software. Results: A total of 25 studies met our inclusion criteria, pooling 1706 participants, with 13 studies on CDHP and 12 studies on DPR. Overall satisfaction rates were high, varying from 84% to 100% across studies. A subgroup analysis revealed that both techniques exhibited equally high satisfaction with no statistical differences (P = 0.18). A random-effects model revealed that about two of 100 treated patients underwent revisions across our cohort (95% interquartile range: 0–4). Notably, the CDHR technique was associated with a significant 53.7-point reduction in the Standardized Cosmesis and Health Nasal Outcomes Survey (SCHNOS)-cosmetic domain [95% confidence interval (CI): −62.7 to −44.8, P < 0.001], along with a meaningful improvement in SCHNOS-obstructive scores by −27.3 points (95% CI: −50.5 to −4.04, P = 0.02). Conversely, the DPR was linked to a 55.3-point reduction in the SCHNOS-cosmetic domain (95% CI: −60.7 to −49.9, P < 0.001), and a −19.5 point change in the SCHNOS-obstructive domain (95% CI: −27.9 to −11.1, P < 0.001). Conclusion: Although PROs are comparable, the literature suggests that CDHR outcomes may be better than DPR in alleviating obstructive symptoms, potentially offering an evidence-based choice for addressing functional concerns in rhinoplasty.

show abstract

Outcome after Dorsal Hump Resection versus Hump Remodeling and Re-insertion: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

The value of virtual simulation for pre-operative planning in Rhinoplasty

The value of virtual simulation for pre-operative planning in Rhinoplasty

Dorsal Preservation versus Component Dorsal Hump Reduction Rhinoplasty: An Assessment of Patient-reported Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About