Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, CA.
Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2014 Feb;4(2):147-50. doi: 10.1002/alr.21241. Epub 2013 Nov 4.
Preservation of an adequate cartilaginous L-strut to prevent complications of septoplasty has been long recognized as critical. However, no previous study has examined the dimensions of the L-strut that remain after septoplasty. We hypothesized that differences in exposure and visualization between endoscopic and endonasal techniques would result in differences in preserved L-strut dimensions. We designed this study to determine L-strut dimensions after performance of septoplasty with endonasal and endoscopic technique.
We performed a cadaveric study with 24 heads randomly assigned to undergo endonasal vs endoscopic septoplasty by senior resident surgeons (postgraduate year 4 [PGY-4] and PGY-5). Removal of the skin-soft tissue envelope and mucoperichondrium was performed after septoplasty to permit direct measurement of the L-strut. Minimum and maximum widths were recorded for the caudal and dorsal segments; a single measurement was recorded for the width at the anterior septal angle. Statistical analysis was carried out using the 2-tailed distribution Student t test.
There was no significant difference in caudal or anterior septal width between endonasal and endoscopic techniques. There was a statistically significant difference in dorsal segment width for both minimum and maximum values, with endoscopic technique resulting in a narrower dorsal segment than endonasal technique (mean minimum value of 10.8 mm vs 13.2 mm, respectively, p = 0.03; and mean maximum value of 12.6 mm vs 16 mm, respectively, p = 0.01). There was significant variation in resident surgeon performance, with the performance of 1 resident surgeon accounting for the difference in minimum dorsal width.
Differences in exposure and visualization between endoscopic and endonasal septoplasty techniques may result in differences in preserved L-strut dimensions. Care should be taken with endoscopic technique to prevent overly aggressive resection of septal cartilage, particularly with learners of this technique.
长期以来,人们一直认识到,保留足够的鼻中隔软骨 L 型支架以防止鼻中隔成形术的并发症至关重要。然而,以前没有研究检查过鼻中隔成形术后 L 型支架的尺寸。我们假设内镜和经鼻技术之间的暴露和可视化差异会导致保留的 L 型支架尺寸的差异。我们设计了这项研究,以确定经鼻和内镜技术行鼻中隔成形术后 L 型支架的尺寸。
我们进行了一项尸体研究,将 24 个头随机分配给资深住院医师(四年级 [PGY-4] 和五年级 [PGY-5])进行经鼻或内镜鼻中隔成形术。鼻中隔成形术后去除皮肤-软组织包膜和黏膜软骨膜,以便直接测量 L 型支架。记录尾侧和背侧段的最小和最大宽度;在前鼻中隔角处记录单个宽度。使用双尾分布学生 t 检验进行统计分析。
经鼻和内镜技术之间尾侧或前鼻中隔宽度没有显著差异。最小和最大值的背侧段宽度存在统计学显著差异,内镜技术导致背侧段比经鼻技术更窄(最小平均值分别为 10.8 毫米和 13.2 毫米,p = 0.03;最大平均值分别为 12.6 毫米和 16 毫米,p = 0.01)。住院医师的表现存在显著差异,1 名住院医师的表现导致最小背侧宽度的差异。
内镜和经鼻鼻中隔成形术技术之间的暴露和可视化差异可能导致保留的 L 型支架尺寸的差异。在使用内镜技术时,应注意避免过度切除鼻中隔软骨,特别是对于该技术的学习者。