螺旋前进:珍珠和陷阱。

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q Medicine Plastic Surgery Pub Date : 2012-01-01
Aa Al-Shaham
{"title":"螺旋前进:珍珠和陷阱。","authors":"Aa Al-Shaham","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Reconstruction of acquired auricular defects is a challenging procedure. Since its emergence, the helical advancement technique has proved to be an excellent method of repairing many auricle defects. This technique may occasionally result in an alteration in the dimensions of the neoauricle, with subsequent deformity. However, the advantages of this technique are well known, while the pitfalls are scarce.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To critically review the selection criteria of patients with acquired auricular defects to determine which are eligible for helical advancement technique without subsequent deformity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From March 2004 to January 2006, 18 patients with three types of upper one-third auricle defects underwent the helical advancement procedure. All patients were male, with mean age of 33.5 years. The defects ranged from 1.2 cm to 4.3 cm in length. Two helical flaps (one on either side of the injury) were advanced along the helical margin to ensure closure. The vertical and horizontal auricular axes were measured before and after surgery, and the actual reduction in millimetres was calculated. Patients were followed up for three months postoperatively. Assessment of the surgical outcome was performed by surgeon (with patient feedback) in the final patient visit.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The principle pitfall in the form of small neoauricle with or without cupping was reported in five patients (27.77%). The defects in these cases were >2.8 cm and the mean resultant reduction in vertical axes was >5 mm. Statistical analysis resulted in χ(2)=4.24 and P=0.04.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The three varieties of upper one-third auricle defects can best be corrected by the helical advancement technique when the defect is <2.8 cm. Furthermore, perioperative reduction in the vertical axis of the neoauricle >5 mm was an important predictive factor in the development of subsequent deformity.</p>","PeriodicalId":50714,"journal":{"name":"Plastic Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3383560/pdf/cjps20e028.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Helical advancement: Pearls and pitfalls.\",\"authors\":\"Aa Al-Shaham\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Reconstruction of acquired auricular defects is a challenging procedure. Since its emergence, the helical advancement technique has proved to be an excellent method of repairing many auricle defects. This technique may occasionally result in an alteration in the dimensions of the neoauricle, with subsequent deformity. However, the advantages of this technique are well known, while the pitfalls are scarce.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To critically review the selection criteria of patients with acquired auricular defects to determine which are eligible for helical advancement technique without subsequent deformity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From March 2004 to January 2006, 18 patients with three types of upper one-third auricle defects underwent the helical advancement procedure. All patients were male, with mean age of 33.5 years. The defects ranged from 1.2 cm to 4.3 cm in length. Two helical flaps (one on either side of the injury) were advanced along the helical margin to ensure closure. The vertical and horizontal auricular axes were measured before and after surgery, and the actual reduction in millimetres was calculated. Patients were followed up for three months postoperatively. Assessment of the surgical outcome was performed by surgeon (with patient feedback) in the final patient visit.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The principle pitfall in the form of small neoauricle with or without cupping was reported in five patients (27.77%). The defects in these cases were >2.8 cm and the mean resultant reduction in vertical axes was >5 mm. Statistical analysis resulted in χ(2)=4.24 and P=0.04.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The three varieties of upper one-third auricle defects can best be corrected by the helical advancement technique when the defect is <2.8 cm. Furthermore, perioperative reduction in the vertical axis of the neoauricle >5 mm was an important predictive factor in the development of subsequent deformity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50714,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Plastic Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3383560/pdf/cjps20e028.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Plastic Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:获得性耳廓缺损的重建是一项具有挑战性的手术。螺旋推进技术自出现以来,已被证明是修复耳廓缺损的一种很好的方法。这种技术偶尔会导致新耳廓尺寸的改变,并导致随后的畸形。然而,这种技术的优点是众所周知的,而缺陷却很少。目的:对获得性耳廓缺损患者的选择标准进行严格审查,以确定哪些患者有资格进行螺旋推进技术,而不会出现后续畸形。方法:自2004年3月至2006年1月,对18例3型耳廓上三分之一缺损患者行螺旋推进术。所有患者均为男性,平均年龄33.5岁。缺陷长度从1.2厘米到4.3厘米不等。两个螺旋皮瓣(损伤两侧各一个)沿螺旋边缘推进以确保闭合。测量手术前后耳轴的垂直和水平方向,计算实际减少的毫米数。术后随访3个月。手术结果的评估由外科医生(与患者反馈)在最后的患者就诊。结果:5例(27.77%)患者以新耳廓小穴为主,有或无拔火罐。这些病例的缺陷大于2.8 cm,垂直轴的平均减少量大于5 mm。χ(2)=4.24, P=0.04。结论:螺旋推进技术对三种上三分之一耳廓缺损的修复效果最好,当缺损5mm时,螺旋推进技术是后续畸形发展的重要预测因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Helical advancement: Pearls and pitfalls.

Background: Reconstruction of acquired auricular defects is a challenging procedure. Since its emergence, the helical advancement technique has proved to be an excellent method of repairing many auricle defects. This technique may occasionally result in an alteration in the dimensions of the neoauricle, with subsequent deformity. However, the advantages of this technique are well known, while the pitfalls are scarce.

Objective: To critically review the selection criteria of patients with acquired auricular defects to determine which are eligible for helical advancement technique without subsequent deformity.

Methods: From March 2004 to January 2006, 18 patients with three types of upper one-third auricle defects underwent the helical advancement procedure. All patients were male, with mean age of 33.5 years. The defects ranged from 1.2 cm to 4.3 cm in length. Two helical flaps (one on either side of the injury) were advanced along the helical margin to ensure closure. The vertical and horizontal auricular axes were measured before and after surgery, and the actual reduction in millimetres was calculated. Patients were followed up for three months postoperatively. Assessment of the surgical outcome was performed by surgeon (with patient feedback) in the final patient visit.

Results: The principle pitfall in the form of small neoauricle with or without cupping was reported in five patients (27.77%). The defects in these cases were >2.8 cm and the mean resultant reduction in vertical axes was >5 mm. Statistical analysis resulted in χ(2)=4.24 and P=0.04.

Conclusion: The three varieties of upper one-third auricle defects can best be corrected by the helical advancement technique when the defect is <2.8 cm. Furthermore, perioperative reduction in the vertical axis of the neoauricle >5 mm was an important predictive factor in the development of subsequent deformity.

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
Plastic Surgery
Plastic Surgery SURGERY-
CiteScore
0.67
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Plastic Surgery (Chirurgie Plastique) is the official journal of the Canadian Society of Plastic Surgeons, the Canadian Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Group for the Advancement of Microsurgery, and the Canadian Society for Surgery of the Hand. It serves as a major venue for Canadian research, society guidelines, and continuing medical education.
期刊最新文献
Accessibility and Insurance Coverage for Gender-affirming Surgery in Canada: A Cross-Sectional Analysis Donor Site Outcomes Following Autologous Breast Reconstruction with DIEP Flap: A Retrospective and Prospective Study in a Single Institution Commentary: Current Practices and Trends of Plastic and Oncoplastic Breast Surgeons in Canada Commentary: Instagram Practices of Successful Plastic Surgeon Accounts: Is There a Magic Formula? Out-of-Pocket Costs and Physician Payment Variations in Abdominal Contouring: Evidence From United States Claims Data
×
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