鼻背保留整形术--"保留者 "与 "结构 "外科医生的观点。

IF 1.6 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine Pub Date : 2024-11-06 DOI:10.1089/fpsam.2024.0141
Mariline Santos, Sam P Most, Ivan Wayne, Sureyya Seneldir, Miguel Gonçalves Ferreira
{"title":"鼻背保留整形术--\"保留者 \"与 \"结构 \"外科医生的观点。","authors":"Mariline Santos, Sam P Most, Ivan Wayne, Sureyya Seneldir, Miguel Gonçalves Ferreira","doi":"10.1089/fpsam.2024.0141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The objective of this study was to describe the surgeons who have incorporated dorsal preservation (DP) into their practice and their techniques. An anonymous form reviewed by the Evidence-Based Rhinoplasty Research Group board was shared on its Telegram group. The study population was divided into three groups based on their answers: \"Preservers,\" \"Mainly Structural,\" and \"Structural exclusively.\" This study included the answers of 145 worldwide surgeons. DP was more common among plastic surgeons than otolaryngologists/facial plastic surgeons; DP techniques were mostly preferred by surgeons with 10-20 years of experience, while structural techniques were mostly preferred by surgeons with > 20 years of experience; 50.8% of the surgeons who prefer DP techniques use it in more than 90% of primaries; surface techniques (ST) have been more used, mainly by surgeons who prefer structural techniques (p < 0.001). ST were considered more stable (p < 0.001), more predictable (p < 0.001), and shorter learning curve (p < 0.001). Many surgeons using DP still perform structural rhinoplasty. The most cited concern was hump persistence/recurrence. DP rhinoplasty is gaining acceptance, and ST are favored for their perceived short learning curve, stability, and predictability. However, concerns about hump recurrence cause some to continue using structural methods alongside DP.</p>","PeriodicalId":48487,"journal":{"name":"Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty-the Perspective of \\\"Preservers\\\" Versus \\\"Structural\\\" Surgeons.\",\"authors\":\"Mariline Santos, Sam P Most, Ivan Wayne, Sureyya Seneldir, Miguel Gonçalves Ferreira\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/fpsam.2024.0141\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The objective of this study was to describe the surgeons who have incorporated dorsal preservation (DP) into their practice and their techniques. An anonymous form reviewed by the Evidence-Based Rhinoplasty Research Group board was shared on its Telegram group. The study population was divided into three groups based on their answers: \\\"Preservers,\\\" \\\"Mainly Structural,\\\" and \\\"Structural exclusively.\\\" This study included the answers of 145 worldwide surgeons. DP was more common among plastic surgeons than otolaryngologists/facial plastic surgeons; DP techniques were mostly preferred by surgeons with 10-20 years of experience, while structural techniques were mostly preferred by surgeons with > 20 years of experience; 50.8% of the surgeons who prefer DP techniques use it in more than 90% of primaries; surface techniques (ST) have been more used, mainly by surgeons who prefer structural techniques (p < 0.001). ST were considered more stable (p < 0.001), more predictable (p < 0.001), and shorter learning curve (p < 0.001). Many surgeons using DP still perform structural rhinoplasty. The most cited concern was hump persistence/recurrence. DP rhinoplasty is gaining acceptance, and ST are favored for their perceived short learning curve, stability, and predictability. However, concerns about hump recurrence cause some to continue using structural methods alongside DP.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48487,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/fpsam.2024.0141\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/fpsam.2024.0141","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

摘要

本研究的目的是描述将鼻背保留(DP)纳入其实践的外科医生及其技术。由循证鼻整形研究小组委员会审核的匿名表格在其 Telegram 群组中共享。研究对象根据他们的答案被分为三组:"保留者"、"主要为结构性 "和 "完全为结构性"。这项研究包括全球 145 名外科医生的回答。在整形外科医生中,DP技术比耳鼻喉科/面部整形外科医生更常见;拥有10-20年经验的外科医生大多偏爱DP技术,而拥有20年以上经验的外科医生大多偏爱结构技术;50.8%偏爱DP技术的外科医生在90%以上的初诊中使用DP技术;表面技术(ST)的使用率更高,主要是偏爱结构技术的外科医生(p < 0.001)。ST被认为更稳定(p < 0.001)、更可预测(p < 0.001)、学习曲线更短(p < 0.001)。许多使用 DP 的外科医生仍在进行结构性鼻整形手术。最常见的问题是驼峰持续存在/复发。DP隆鼻术正在被越来越多的人接受,ST隆鼻术因其学习曲线短、稳定性和可预测性而受到青睐。然而,对驼峰复发的担忧导致一些人在使用DP的同时继续使用结构性方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Dorsal Preservation Rhinoplasty-the Perspective of "Preservers" Versus "Structural" Surgeons.

The objective of this study was to describe the surgeons who have incorporated dorsal preservation (DP) into their practice and their techniques. An anonymous form reviewed by the Evidence-Based Rhinoplasty Research Group board was shared on its Telegram group. The study population was divided into three groups based on their answers: "Preservers," "Mainly Structural," and "Structural exclusively." This study included the answers of 145 worldwide surgeons. DP was more common among plastic surgeons than otolaryngologists/facial plastic surgeons; DP techniques were mostly preferred by surgeons with 10-20 years of experience, while structural techniques were mostly preferred by surgeons with > 20 years of experience; 50.8% of the surgeons who prefer DP techniques use it in more than 90% of primaries; surface techniques (ST) have been more used, mainly by surgeons who prefer structural techniques (p < 0.001). ST were considered more stable (p < 0.001), more predictable (p < 0.001), and shorter learning curve (p < 0.001). Many surgeons using DP still perform structural rhinoplasty. The most cited concern was hump persistence/recurrence. DP rhinoplasty is gaining acceptance, and ST are favored for their perceived short learning curve, stability, and predictability. However, concerns about hump recurrence cause some to continue using structural methods alongside DP.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
30.00%
发文量
159
期刊最新文献
Cost Comparison of Industry Versus In-House Three-Dimensional Printed Models for Microvascular Mandible Reconstruction. Intradermal Injection of Tranexamic Acid for the Treatment of Adult Melasma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Tranexamic Acid in Rhytidectomy: A Split-Face Multi-Institutional Study. Commentary on Von Sneidern et al's "Evaluation and Treatment of Acute Facial Palsy: Opportunities for Optimization at a Single Institution."-Bridging the Gap Between Guidelines and Practice. Evaluation and Treatment of Acute Facial Palsy: Opportunities for Optimization at a Single Institution.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1