Background: Restoration of nasal lining is essential in reconstruction of subtotal/total nasal defects. When local flaps are inadequate, a microvascular flap should be used. The purpose of this scoping review is to map the literature and identify the described flap options for subtotal/total nasal reconstruction. Further to that, we will summarize the stated advantages and disadvantages, evaluate functional and esthetic outcomes, and appraise the current body of literature.
Methods: An electronic literature search was completed. Studies required adult patients with subtotal/total nasal defects and lining reconstruction with microvascular free flap. Two independent reviewers completed screening and data extraction. Flap characteristics, advantages, disadvantages, functional and esthetic outcomes were reviewed. Two independent reviewers evaluated study quality. Results: Of 305 initial articles, 22 studies were included (13 case reports, 9 case series) accounting for 65 flaps. Microvascular flaps varied by composition and anatomical location. For functional outcome, 13 studies used clinical exam by surgeon, 5 reported patient being satisfied, 3 studies used endoscopy, and 1 study used nasometry. Assessing esthetic outcome, 13 studies used clinical exam by surgeon, 5 studies reported patient being satisfied, 1 study used patientreported outcome measures, and 16 studies included photos. Study quality (modified CARE and PROCESS checklists) was deemed poor. Quality of available evidence was level IV.Conclusions: Microvascular free flaps for nasal reconstruction, confer an overall satisfactory functional and esthetic outcome. All studies lack a systematic and comprehensive approach to assessing and reporting these outcomes. Future research should provide objective assessment and utilize patient reported outcome measures.
Individual studies demonstrate ultrasound as an effective diagnostic tool for traumatic adult BPI. Sensitivity of lesion detection was noted to be greater in the upper and middle (C5-C7) than in the lower spinal nerves (C8, T1). Further standardized studies should be performed to confirm the utility of ultrasound in the diagnosis of traumatic adult BPI.
ObjectiveTo validate the pharyngeal findings in sleep nasopharyngoscopy (SNP) of children with snoring - sleep disordered breathing (S-SDB).DesignProspective agreement diagnostic study on retrospective data.MethodsWe conducted an inter-and intra-rater agreement study on video documentations of SNP performed on children (non-syndromic, complex, or operated upon) who presented with S-SDB. The videos featured various pharyngeal findings (normal, collapse, mixed or obstruction). Three ‘non-expert’ raters at various stages in their otolaryngological careers rated the videos independently, and on two separate occasions following an instructional session. We calculated both weighted and non-weighted linear kappa.ResultsEach independent observer rated sixty-one videos (2 weeks apart). Intra-observer agreement was 0.64 ± 0.08 (95% CI 0.48-0.81), 0.74 ± 0.07 (95% CI 0.60-0.88), 0.59 ± 0.08 (95% CI 0.43-0.74), for raters 1, two and three. Weighted kappa was 0.6 ± 0.1 (95% CI 0.41-0.79), 0.8 ± 0.06 (95% CI 0.7-0.92), 0.7 ± 0.07 (95% CI 0.57-0.83), respectively. Inter-rater agreements between raters one and two, two and three, three and four were 0.83 ± 0.06 (95% CI 0.71-0.95), 0.52 ± 0.08 (95% CI 0.36-0.70), and 0.53 ± 0.08 (95% CI 0.37-0.69), respectively. Weighted kappa was 0.83 ± 0.073 (95% CI 0.69-0.98), 0.68 ± 0.06 (95% CI 0.56-0.79), and 0.64 ± 0.07 (95% CI 0.49-0.78), respectively.ConclusionsThis is the first validation of pharyngeal findings on SNP in children. It is based on a four types’ classification. Overall reproducibility amongst the three raters and their agreement was moderate to good. Further work should be phase four trials investigating the impact on outcome.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.