{"title":"Aesthetic Unit Preservation in Emergency Facial Lacerations: A Prospective Evaluation of Landmark-Based Nerve Blocks.","authors":"Chen Chen, Jie Mi, Ling Zhou, Fei Li","doi":"10.1007/s00266-025-04664-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Facial trauma repair requires precise reconstruction while preserving aesthetic units. Traditional local anesthesia can distort tissue planes and compromise surgical precision.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective study evaluated landmark-based nerve blocks versus local infiltration for complex facial laceration repair in emergency settings from January 2022 through February 2023. A total of 162 patients were randomized to receive either landmark-based nerve blocks (n = 80) or traditional local anesthesia (n = 82). The nerve block group received targeted injections at anatomical landmarks, while the control group received traditional wound margin infiltration.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The nerve block group demonstrated significantly reduced anesthetic volume (2.03 ± 0.82 mL vs. 4.94 ± 1.71 mL, p < 0.001), lower pain scores (median 2 vs. 5, p < 0.001), and better preservation of facial topography with reduced tissue distortion (0.6 ± 0.5 vs. 1.8 ± 0.7, p<0.001). Superior maintenance of anatomical landmarks (96.3% vs. 88.4%, p = 0.02), aesthetic subunit symmetry (94.8% vs. 87.2%, p = 0.03), and cosmetic junction line alignment (95.5% vs. 86.9%, p = 0.02) was observed in the nerve block group. Three-month POSAS scores showed better outcomes in the nerve block group for both observer and patient assessments (p < 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While some technical challenges exist with zygomaticofacial and zygomaticotemporal blocks, landmark-based nerve blocks represent an effective approach for complex facial laceration repair, offering improved surgical precision and patient comfort.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence ii: </strong>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 .</p>","PeriodicalId":7609,"journal":{"name":"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-025-04664-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Facial trauma repair requires precise reconstruction while preserving aesthetic units. Traditional local anesthesia can distort tissue planes and compromise surgical precision.
Methods: This prospective study evaluated landmark-based nerve blocks versus local infiltration for complex facial laceration repair in emergency settings from January 2022 through February 2023. A total of 162 patients were randomized to receive either landmark-based nerve blocks (n = 80) or traditional local anesthesia (n = 82). The nerve block group received targeted injections at anatomical landmarks, while the control group received traditional wound margin infiltration.
Results: The nerve block group demonstrated significantly reduced anesthetic volume (2.03 ± 0.82 mL vs. 4.94 ± 1.71 mL, p < 0.001), lower pain scores (median 2 vs. 5, p < 0.001), and better preservation of facial topography with reduced tissue distortion (0.6 ± 0.5 vs. 1.8 ± 0.7, p<0.001). Superior maintenance of anatomical landmarks (96.3% vs. 88.4%, p = 0.02), aesthetic subunit symmetry (94.8% vs. 87.2%, p = 0.03), and cosmetic junction line alignment (95.5% vs. 86.9%, p = 0.02) was observed in the nerve block group. Three-month POSAS scores showed better outcomes in the nerve block group for both observer and patient assessments (p < 0.01).
Conclusions: While some technical challenges exist with zygomaticofacial and zygomaticotemporal blocks, landmark-based nerve blocks represent an effective approach for complex facial laceration repair, offering improved surgical precision and patient comfort.
Level of evidence ii: 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 .
背景:面部创伤修复需要精确重建,同时保留美学单位。传统的局部麻醉会扭曲组织平面,影响手术精度。方法:这项前瞻性研究评估了2022年1月至2023年2月在紧急情况下基于地标性神经阻滞和局部浸润的复杂面部撕裂伤修复。共有162名患者被随机分为两组,一组接受地标性神经阻滞(n = 80),另一组接受传统局部麻醉(n = 82)。神经阻滞组在解剖标志处进行靶向注射,对照组采用传统的创面缘浸润。结果:神经阻滞组麻醉体积明显减少(2.03±0.82 mL vs. 4.94±1.71 mL)。结论:尽管颧面和颧颞阻滞存在一些技术挑战,但基于里程碑的神经阻滞是修复复杂面部撕裂伤的有效方法,可以提高手术精度和患者舒适度。证据等级ii:本刊要求作者为每篇文章指定证据等级。有关这些循证医学评级的完整描述,请参阅目录或在线作者说明www.springer.com/00266。
期刊介绍:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery is a publication of the International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery and the official journal of the European Association of Societies of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (EASAPS), Società Italiana di Chirurgia Plastica Ricostruttiva ed Estetica (SICPRE), Vereinigung der Deutschen Aesthetisch Plastischen Chirurgen (VDAPC), the Romanian Aesthetic Surgery Society (RASS), Asociación Española de Cirugía Estética Plástica (AECEP), La Sociedad Argentina de Cirugía Plástica, Estética y Reparadora (SACPER), the Rhinoplasty Society of Europe (RSE), the Iranian Society of Plastic and Aesthetic Surgeons (ISPAS), the Singapore Association of Plastic Surgeons (SAPS), the Australasian Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (ASAPS), the Egyptian Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (ESPRS), and the Sociedad Chilena de Cirugía Plástica, Reconstructiva y Estética (SCCP).
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery provides a forum for original articles advancing the art of aesthetic plastic surgery. Many describe surgical craftsmanship; others deal with complications in surgical procedures and methods by which to treat or avoid them. Coverage includes "second thoughts" on established techniques, which might be abandoned, modified, or improved. Also included are case histories; improvements in surgical instruments, pharmaceuticals, and operating room equipment; and discussions of problems such as the role of psychosocial factors in the doctor-patient and the patient-public interrelationships.
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery is covered in Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, SciSearch, Research Alert, Index Medicus-Medline, and Excerpta Medica/Embase.