No abstract

The high number of marginal mandibular nerve (MMN) anatomical variants have a well‐known clinical significance due to the risk of nerve injury in several surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to find and systematize the available anatomical data concerning this nerve. The PubMed and Scopus databases were investigated in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses guidelines. All studies reporting extractable data on the origin, course, splitting, anastomosis and relationship of the MMN with the mandible or the facial vessels were included. We included 28 studies analyzing 1861 halves. The MMN had one (PP = 35% 95% CI:18–54%), two (PP =35% 95% CI:18–54%), three (PP = 18% 95% CI:0–35%), or four branches (PP = 2% 95% CI:0–8%). Anastomosis with the great auricular nerve, transverse cervical nerve, mental nerve, and other branches of the facial nerve were defined. The origin of the MMN in relation to the parotid and the mandible was variable. The MMN nearly always crossed the anterior facial vein laterally (PP = 38% 95% CI:9–72% if single, PP = 57% 95% CI:22–90% when multiple); its relation with other vessels was less constant. At least one branch of the MMN was found below the inferior border of the mandible (IBM), with a PP of 39% (95% CI:30–50%). The MMN has high anatomical variability and it is more often represented by one or two branches; its origin is frequently described at the parotid apex and above the IBM, although in its course at least one branch often runs below the IBM. Its most frequent anastomosis is with the buccal branch of the facial nerve. Clin. Anat., 33:739–750, 2020. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Dorsal hump reduction is a crucial point of rhinoplasty, as it has a great impact on the final shape of nasal pyramid. Depending on morphological features of the hump, its removal is usually obtained by the use of an osteotome or a rasp. In our study, we describe a closed rhinoplasty technique performed in 2 groups of patients: the only difference between the groups is the surgical tools used during the dorsal hump removal phase (rasp vs the 5-mm osteotome).We used 2 questionnaires of quality of life (QoL), Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE), and Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) questionnaire, to evaluate postoperative outcome (6 months after surgery).Closed rhinoplasty was performed in 107 patients. Dorsal hump removal was carried out with rasp on 35 patients; while in 72 cases, it was performed using a 5-mm osteotome. All the patients were given 2 copies of NOSE and ROE questionnaires (1 month before surgery and 6 months after surgery) to evaluate postoperative QoL. In our study emerged that the use of osteotome in dorsal hump reduction is associated with a better aesthetic outcome (evaluated by analyzing patients QoL with ROE questionnaire) without any difference between the 2 groups in terms of functional outcome (expressed by NOSE questionnaire), major and minor complications and surgical procedure duration.