Long-Term Outcome of Cleft Lip Nasal Reconstruction in Childhood

This study documents the pattern of unilateral cleft lip nasal reconstruction in the practice of one surgeon at a tertiary cleft center, evaluating the long-term appearance outcome of single-operation unilateral cleft lip nasal reconstruction in childhood.A retrospective medical record review was pe...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963) 2000-04, Vol.105 (5), p.1600-1608
Hauptverfasser: Kane, Alex A, Pilgram, Thomas K, Moshiri, Mazyar, Marsh, Jeffrey L
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1608
container_issue 5
container_start_page 1600
container_title Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963)
container_volume 105
creator Kane, Alex A
Pilgram, Thomas K
Moshiri, Mazyar
Marsh, Jeffrey L
description This study documents the pattern of unilateral cleft lip nasal reconstruction in the practice of one surgeon at a tertiary cleft center, evaluating the long-term appearance outcome of single-operation unilateral cleft lip nasal reconstruction in childhood.A retrospective medical record review was performed for all patients with a diagnosis of unilateral cleft lip and age greater than 15 years. Operative notes were reviewed, recording 15 variables identifying specific rhinoplastic maneuvers. Nasal appearance outcome analysis was performed for all patients who underwent only one nasal surgery before 12 years of age (n = 19). Standard frontal whole face photographic images were presented as opposing pairs in a looseleaf binder to two panels, 1 of 10 lay persons and 1 of 10 plastic surgeons. Each pair consisted of photographs of the same patient at different ages in one of three combinationspreoperative-perioperative, perioperative-longest postoperative, or preoperative-longest postoperative. Participants were asked to compare the appearance of the noses in the two photographs and assign a rating based on a 5-point Likert scale. Statistical analyses were performed on the data collected in the aesthetic analysis. The effect of surgery upon nasal appearance was assessed by comparing the preoperative and perioperative photographs. The effect of growth was assessed by comparing the perioperative and long-term postoperative photographs. The combined effect of surgery and growth was assessed by comparing the preoperative and long-term postoperative photographs. The data were assessed by lay and professional evaluators, together and separately, to determine whether differences existed.The majority of patients did not undergo revisional nasal surgery, whereas those who did usually had one nasal operation. Most revisional nasal surgery was performed in conjunction with other cleft-related secondary surgery. A majority of lay and professional evaluators perceived revisional nasal surgery as improving nasal appearance in the short-term and to a lesser degree in the long-term, as compared with the preoperative state. Evaluations of revisional nasal surgery are generally constant between the short-term and long-term postoperative images. Lay evaluations may be contaminated by a general decline in attractiveness with aging.Patient preference should be a major factor in the decision for nasal revision surgery. Multiple means of assessing nasal appearance outcome need to be u
doi_str_mv 10.1097/00006534-200004050-00002
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71106468</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>71106468</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3852-dfd36f08a5368a8e6e058ac95ff13f0f0831b1613d931d6cf9e952d9052256643</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUtLAzEQx4MoWh9fQXIQb6uTZJMmN6X4gqIg9RzSbGJXs5ua7CJ-e7e2Pi7OZYaZ3zz4D0KYwBkBNT6HwQRnZUFXUQkcilVAt9CIcKqKkpZ0G40AGC0IcLqH9nN-ASBjJvgu2iMgQYEcj9DFNLbPxcylBj_0nY2Nw9HjSXC-w9N6ie9NNgE_Ohvb3KXednVscd3iyaIO1SLG6hDteBOyO9r4A_R0fTWb3BbTh5u7yeW0sExyWlS-YsKDNJwJaaQTDrg0VnHvCfMwVBiZE0FYpRiphPXKKU4rNRxPuRAlO0Cn67nLFN96lzvd1Nm6EEzrYp_1mBAQpZADKNegTTHn5Lxeprox6UMT0Cv19Ld6-ke9rxQdWo83O_p546o_jWu5BuBkA5hsTfDJtLbOvxwjUig2YOUae4-hcym_hv7dJb1wJnQL_d_z2CcnvoQz</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>71106468</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Long-Term Outcome of Cleft Lip Nasal Reconstruction in Childhood</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload</source><creator>Kane, Alex A ; Pilgram, Thomas K ; Moshiri, Mazyar ; Marsh, Jeffrey L</creator><creatorcontrib>Kane, Alex A ; Pilgram, Thomas K ; Moshiri, Mazyar ; Marsh, Jeffrey L</creatorcontrib><description>This study documents the pattern of unilateral cleft lip nasal reconstruction in the practice of one surgeon at a tertiary cleft center, evaluating the long-term appearance outcome of single-operation unilateral cleft lip nasal reconstruction in childhood.A retrospective medical record review was performed for all patients with a diagnosis of unilateral cleft lip and age greater than 15 years. Operative notes were reviewed, recording 15 variables identifying specific rhinoplastic maneuvers. Nasal appearance outcome analysis was performed for all patients who underwent only one nasal surgery before 12 years of age (n = 19). Standard frontal whole face photographic images were presented as opposing pairs in a looseleaf binder to two panels, 1 of 10 lay persons and 1 of 10 plastic surgeons. Each pair consisted of photographs of the same patient at different ages in one of three combinationspreoperative-perioperative, perioperative-longest postoperative, or preoperative-longest postoperative. Participants were asked to compare the appearance of the noses in the two photographs and assign a rating based on a 5-point Likert scale. Statistical analyses were performed on the data collected in the aesthetic analysis. The effect of surgery upon nasal appearance was assessed by comparing the preoperative and perioperative photographs. The effect of growth was assessed by comparing the perioperative and long-term postoperative photographs. The combined effect of surgery and growth was assessed by comparing the preoperative and long-term postoperative photographs. The data were assessed by lay and professional evaluators, together and separately, to determine whether differences existed.The majority of patients did not undergo revisional nasal surgery, whereas those who did usually had one nasal operation. Most revisional nasal surgery was performed in conjunction with other cleft-related secondary surgery. A majority of lay and professional evaluators perceived revisional nasal surgery as improving nasal appearance in the short-term and to a lesser degree in the long-term, as compared with the preoperative state. Evaluations of revisional nasal surgery are generally constant between the short-term and long-term postoperative images. Lay evaluations may be contaminated by a general decline in attractiveness with aging.Patient preference should be a major factor in the decision for nasal revision surgery. Multiple means of assessing nasal appearance outcome need to be used to validate results. Nasal appearance outcomes need to be correlated with outcomes with respect to nasal morphology and function as well as patient and parent satisfaction. (Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 1051600, 2000.)</description><identifier>ISSN: 0032-1052</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1529-4242</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/00006534-200004050-00002</identifier><identifier>PMID: 10809087</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hagerstown, MD: American Society of Plastic Surgeons</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Biological and medical sciences ; Child ; Cleft Lip - surgery ; Cleft Palate - surgery ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Head and neck surgery. Maxillofacial surgery. Dental surgery. Orthodontics ; Humans ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Non tumoral diseases ; Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology ; Patient Satisfaction ; Postoperative Complications - etiology ; Postoperative Complications - surgery ; Reoperation ; Retrospective Studies ; Rhinoplasty ; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases ; Surgery of the upper aerodigestive tract ; Upper respiratory tract, upper alimentary tract, paranasal sinuses, salivary glands: diseases, semeiology</subject><ispartof>Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963), 2000-04, Vol.105 (5), p.1600-1608</ispartof><rights>2000American Society of Plastic Surgeons</rights><rights>2000 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3852-dfd36f08a5368a8e6e058ac95ff13f0f0831b1613d931d6cf9e952d9052256643</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3852-dfd36f08a5368a8e6e058ac95ff13f0f0831b1613d931d6cf9e952d9052256643</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>309,310,314,777,781,786,787,23911,23912,25121,27905,27906</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=1318693$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10809087$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kane, Alex A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pilgram, Thomas K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moshiri, Mazyar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marsh, Jeffrey L</creatorcontrib><title>Long-Term Outcome of Cleft Lip Nasal Reconstruction in Childhood</title><title>Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963)</title><addtitle>Plast Reconstr Surg</addtitle><description>This study documents the pattern of unilateral cleft lip nasal reconstruction in the practice of one surgeon at a tertiary cleft center, evaluating the long-term appearance outcome of single-operation unilateral cleft lip nasal reconstruction in childhood.A retrospective medical record review was performed for all patients with a diagnosis of unilateral cleft lip and age greater than 15 years. Operative notes were reviewed, recording 15 variables identifying specific rhinoplastic maneuvers. Nasal appearance outcome analysis was performed for all patients who underwent only one nasal surgery before 12 years of age (n = 19). Standard frontal whole face photographic images were presented as opposing pairs in a looseleaf binder to two panels, 1 of 10 lay persons and 1 of 10 plastic surgeons. Each pair consisted of photographs of the same patient at different ages in one of three combinationspreoperative-perioperative, perioperative-longest postoperative, or preoperative-longest postoperative. Participants were asked to compare the appearance of the noses in the two photographs and assign a rating based on a 5-point Likert scale. Statistical analyses were performed on the data collected in the aesthetic analysis. The effect of surgery upon nasal appearance was assessed by comparing the preoperative and perioperative photographs. The effect of growth was assessed by comparing the perioperative and long-term postoperative photographs. The combined effect of surgery and growth was assessed by comparing the preoperative and long-term postoperative photographs. The data were assessed by lay and professional evaluators, together and separately, to determine whether differences existed.The majority of patients did not undergo revisional nasal surgery, whereas those who did usually had one nasal operation. Most revisional nasal surgery was performed in conjunction with other cleft-related secondary surgery. A majority of lay and professional evaluators perceived revisional nasal surgery as improving nasal appearance in the short-term and to a lesser degree in the long-term, as compared with the preoperative state. Evaluations of revisional nasal surgery are generally constant between the short-term and long-term postoperative images. Lay evaluations may be contaminated by a general decline in attractiveness with aging.Patient preference should be a major factor in the decision for nasal revision surgery. Multiple means of assessing nasal appearance outcome need to be used to validate results. Nasal appearance outcomes need to be correlated with outcomes with respect to nasal morphology and function as well as patient and parent satisfaction. (Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 1051600, 2000.)</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Cleft Lip - surgery</subject><subject>Cleft Palate - surgery</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Head and neck surgery. Maxillofacial surgery. Dental surgery. Orthodontics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Non tumoral diseases</subject><subject>Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology</subject><subject>Patient Satisfaction</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - etiology</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - surgery</subject><subject>Reoperation</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Rhinoplasty</subject><subject>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</subject><subject>Surgery of the upper aerodigestive tract</subject><subject>Upper respiratory tract, upper alimentary tract, paranasal sinuses, salivary glands: diseases, semeiology</subject><issn>0032-1052</issn><issn>1529-4242</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kUtLAzEQx4MoWh9fQXIQb6uTZJMmN6X4gqIg9RzSbGJXs5ua7CJ-e7e2Pi7OZYaZ3zz4D0KYwBkBNT6HwQRnZUFXUQkcilVAt9CIcKqKkpZ0G40AGC0IcLqH9nN-ASBjJvgu2iMgQYEcj9DFNLbPxcylBj_0nY2Nw9HjSXC-w9N6ie9NNgE_Ohvb3KXednVscd3iyaIO1SLG6hDteBOyO9r4A_R0fTWb3BbTh5u7yeW0sExyWlS-YsKDNJwJaaQTDrg0VnHvCfMwVBiZE0FYpRiphPXKKU4rNRxPuRAlO0Cn67nLFN96lzvd1Nm6EEzrYp_1mBAQpZADKNegTTHn5Lxeprox6UMT0Cv19Ld6-ke9rxQdWo83O_p546o_jWu5BuBkA5hsTfDJtLbOvxwjUig2YOUae4-hcym_hv7dJb1wJnQL_d_z2CcnvoQz</recordid><startdate>200004</startdate><enddate>200004</enddate><creator>Kane, Alex A</creator><creator>Pilgram, Thomas K</creator><creator>Moshiri, Mazyar</creator><creator>Marsh, Jeffrey L</creator><general>American Society of Plastic Surgeons</general><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200004</creationdate><title>Long-Term Outcome of Cleft Lip Nasal Reconstruction in Childhood</title><author>Kane, Alex A ; Pilgram, Thomas K ; Moshiri, Mazyar ; Marsh, Jeffrey L</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3852-dfd36f08a5368a8e6e058ac95ff13f0f0831b1613d931d6cf9e952d9052256643</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Cleft Lip - surgery</topic><topic>Cleft Palate - surgery</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Head and neck surgery. Maxillofacial surgery. Dental surgery. Orthodontics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Non tumoral diseases</topic><topic>Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology</topic><topic>Patient Satisfaction</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - etiology</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - surgery</topic><topic>Reoperation</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Rhinoplasty</topic><topic>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</topic><topic>Surgery of the upper aerodigestive tract</topic><topic>Upper respiratory tract, upper alimentary tract, paranasal sinuses, salivary glands: diseases, semeiology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kane, Alex A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pilgram, Thomas K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moshiri, Mazyar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marsh, Jeffrey L</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kane, Alex A</au><au>Pilgram, Thomas K</au><au>Moshiri, Mazyar</au><au>Marsh, Jeffrey L</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Long-Term Outcome of Cleft Lip Nasal Reconstruction in Childhood</atitle><jtitle>Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963)</jtitle><addtitle>Plast Reconstr Surg</addtitle><date>2000-04</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>105</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1600</spage><epage>1608</epage><pages>1600-1608</pages><issn>0032-1052</issn><eissn>1529-4242</eissn><abstract>This study documents the pattern of unilateral cleft lip nasal reconstruction in the practice of one surgeon at a tertiary cleft center, evaluating the long-term appearance outcome of single-operation unilateral cleft lip nasal reconstruction in childhood.A retrospective medical record review was performed for all patients with a diagnosis of unilateral cleft lip and age greater than 15 years. Operative notes were reviewed, recording 15 variables identifying specific rhinoplastic maneuvers. Nasal appearance outcome analysis was performed for all patients who underwent only one nasal surgery before 12 years of age (n = 19). Standard frontal whole face photographic images were presented as opposing pairs in a looseleaf binder to two panels, 1 of 10 lay persons and 1 of 10 plastic surgeons. Each pair consisted of photographs of the same patient at different ages in one of three combinationspreoperative-perioperative, perioperative-longest postoperative, or preoperative-longest postoperative. Participants were asked to compare the appearance of the noses in the two photographs and assign a rating based on a 5-point Likert scale. Statistical analyses were performed on the data collected in the aesthetic analysis. The effect of surgery upon nasal appearance was assessed by comparing the preoperative and perioperative photographs. The effect of growth was assessed by comparing the perioperative and long-term postoperative photographs. The combined effect of surgery and growth was assessed by comparing the preoperative and long-term postoperative photographs. The data were assessed by lay and professional evaluators, together and separately, to determine whether differences existed.The majority of patients did not undergo revisional nasal surgery, whereas those who did usually had one nasal operation. Most revisional nasal surgery was performed in conjunction with other cleft-related secondary surgery. A majority of lay and professional evaluators perceived revisional nasal surgery as improving nasal appearance in the short-term and to a lesser degree in the long-term, as compared with the preoperative state. Evaluations of revisional nasal surgery are generally constant between the short-term and long-term postoperative images. Lay evaluations may be contaminated by a general decline in attractiveness with aging.Patient preference should be a major factor in the decision for nasal revision surgery. Multiple means of assessing nasal appearance outcome need to be used to validate results. Nasal appearance outcomes need to be correlated with outcomes with respect to nasal morphology and function as well as patient and parent satisfaction. (Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 1051600, 2000.)</abstract><cop>Hagerstown, MD</cop><pub>American Society of Plastic Surgeons</pub><pmid>10809087</pmid><doi>10.1097/00006534-200004050-00002</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0032-1052
ispartof Plastic and reconstructive surgery (1963), 2000-04, Vol.105 (5), p.1600-1608
issn 0032-1052
1529-4242
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71106468
source MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload
subjects Adolescent
Biological and medical sciences
Child
Cleft Lip - surgery
Cleft Palate - surgery
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Head and neck surgery. Maxillofacial surgery. Dental surgery. Orthodontics
Humans
Male
Medical sciences
Non tumoral diseases
Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology
Patient Satisfaction
Postoperative Complications - etiology
Postoperative Complications - surgery
Reoperation
Retrospective Studies
Rhinoplasty
Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases
Surgery of the upper aerodigestive tract
Upper respiratory tract, upper alimentary tract, paranasal sinuses, salivary glands: diseases, semeiology
title Long-Term Outcome of Cleft Lip Nasal Reconstruction in Childhood
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T17%3A56%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Long-Term%20Outcome%20of%20Cleft%20Lip%20Nasal%20Reconstruction%20in%20Childhood&rft.jtitle=Plastic%20and%20reconstructive%20surgery%20(1963)&rft.au=Kane,%20Alex%20A&rft.date=2000-04&rft.volume=105&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1600&rft.epage=1608&rft.pages=1600-1608&rft.issn=0032-1052&rft.eissn=1529-4242&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/00006534-200004050-00002&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E71106468%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=71106468&rft_id=info:pmid/10809087&rfr_iscdi=true