Timmins Benjamin H, Hunter Benjamin N, Wilson Kevin F, Ward P Daniel
School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.
Division of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.
Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2016 May;6(5):544-8. doi: 10.1002/alr.21703. Epub 2016 Jan 11.
Nasal closure has been shown to effectively manage severe epistaxis refractory to other treatments in patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT). The nasal closure procedure may be underutilized because of its surgical complexity and flap breakdown.
This work is a retrospective review of 13 HHT patients treated for severe epistaxis with nasal closure between 2005 and 2013. Operating room (OR) time, need for revision surgery, preprocedure, and postprocedure epistaxis severity score (ESS), complete blood count values, and Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) questionnaire results were collected for each patient. The technique is described. We characterize a typical nasal closure patient and compare outcomes based on our experience with the traditional 3-flap closure and a simplified 2-flap nasal closure procedure.
The average candidate for nasal closure in this series had an ESS of 7.88, hemoglobin (Hgb) of 8.3 g/dL, and received multiple transfusions, iron therapy, and cautery/coagulation procedures. Average ESS subsequent to nasal closure using the 2-flap method is 0.92 and mean GBI score is 56.3. Comparison of 5 patients who underwent the traditional 3-flap nasal closure procedure and 8 patients receiving the 2-flap nasal closure showed no significant difference in postoperative ESS or GBI metrics. Mean operating room times of the traditional and simplified methods were 3.12 hours and 1.44 hours (p = 0.0001). Mean time to first revision for 8 nasal closure patients was 21.5 months.
In short-term follow-up, the 2-flap procedure showed comparable effectiveness with significantly reduced complexity and operative time compared to the traditional nasal closure method.
鼻闭合术已被证明可有效治疗遗传性出血性毛细血管扩张症(HHT)患者中对其他治疗方法无效的严重鼻出血。由于其手术复杂性和皮瓣坏死,鼻闭合术的应用可能不足。
这项研究是对2005年至2013年间13例接受鼻闭合术治疗严重鼻出血的HHT患者的回顾性分析。收集每位患者的手术时间、再次手术需求、术前和术后鼻出血严重程度评分(ESS)、全血细胞计数以及格拉斯哥效益量表(GBI)问卷结果。描述了该技术。我们对典型的鼻闭合术患者进行了特征描述,并根据我们在传统三皮瓣闭合术和简化两皮瓣鼻闭合术方面的经验比较了结果。
本系列中鼻闭合术的平均候选患者ESS为7.88,血红蛋白(Hgb)为8.3 g/dL,接受了多次输血、铁剂治疗以及烧灼/凝血治疗。采用两皮瓣法进行鼻闭合术后的平均ESS为0.92,GBI平均评分为56.3。对5例行传统三皮瓣鼻闭合术的患者和8例行两皮瓣鼻闭合术的患者进行比较,术后ESS或GBI指标无显著差异。传统方法和简化方法的平均手术时间分别为3.12小时和1.44小时(p = 0.0001)。8例鼻闭合术患者首次翻修的平均时间为21.5个月。
在短期随访中,与传统鼻闭合术相比,两皮瓣法显示出相当的有效性,且复杂性和手术时间显著降低。