Larrabee Yuna C, Phillips David J, Sclafani Anthony P
Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.
Facial Plast Surg. 2017 Feb;33(1):17-19. doi: 10.1055/s-0036-1597683. Epub 2017 Feb 22.
To determine if facial plastic and reconstructive surgeons still adhere to the classic nasal subunit principle as described by Burget and Menick. Observational survey. A Weill Cornell Medicine institutional review board approved electronic survey that was sent via e-mail to active members of the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (AAFPRS). The survey consisted of 32 multiple-choice questions pertaining to the operative management of small (22-30%), medium (50-58%), and large (75-81%) defects of each subunit of the nose, as well as demographic, provider, and practice characteristics. There were 111 responses to the survey (10.1% response rate). Ninety-eight percent of respondents reported familiarity with the subunit principle, and 59.6% considered the subunit principle in greater than 90% of cases. Almost three-quarters (70.4%) of respondents felt the subunit principle should be applied but could be modified based on the particular nasal defect, whereas 28.7% felt it was only sometimes helpful and was not mandatory for successful nasal reconstruction. Large defects of the tip and ala are generally treated by excision of the remaining subunit (79.4 and 80.6%, respectively). Fewer surgeons would excise the remaining subunit for large defects of the dorsum (39.8%), sidewall (38.8%), and soft tissue facet (18.4%). Simple repair without additional excision was the treatment of choice for small defects of the tip (58.2%), ala (59.2%), sidewall (65%), dorsum (68%), and soft tissue facet (71.8%). However, in many small- (up to 32%) and medium- (up to 51%) sized defects of the tip, ala, sidewall, and dorsum, respondents reported partial subunit excision. The majority of AAFPRS members abide to the classical subunit principle by completely excising the remaining subunit for large defects of the tip and ala. Many surgeons modify the subunit principle in small and medium defects.
确定面部整形和重建外科医生是否仍遵循Burget和Menick所描述的经典鼻亚单位原则。观察性调查。一项由威尔康奈尔医学院机构审查委员会批准的电子调查,通过电子邮件发送给美国面部整形和重建外科学会(AAFPRS)的活跃成员。该调查包括32个多项选择题,涉及鼻子各亚单位小(22%-30%)、中(50%-58%)和大(75%-81%)缺损的手术处理,以及人口统计学、提供者和实践特征。该调查共收到111份回复(回复率为10.1%)。98%的受访者表示熟悉亚单位原则,59.6%的受访者在超过90%的病例中考虑了亚单位原则。近四分之三(70.4%)的受访者认为应应用亚单位原则,但可根据特定的鼻缺损进行修改,而28.7%的受访者认为它只是有时有帮助,对于成功的鼻重建并非必需。鼻尖和鼻翼的大缺损通常通过切除剩余亚单位来治疗(分别为79.4%和80.6%)。对于鼻背、侧壁和软组织面的大缺损,较少有外科医生会切除剩余亚单位(分别为39.8%、38.8%和18.4%)。对于鼻尖、鼻翼、侧壁、鼻背和软组织面的小缺损,不进行额外切除的简单修复是首选治疗方法(分别为58.2%、59.2%、65%、68%和71.8%)。然而,在鼻尖、鼻翼、侧壁和鼻背的许多小(高达32%)和中(高达51%)尺寸的缺损中,受访者报告了部分亚单位切除。大多数AAFPRS成员通过完全切除鼻尖和鼻翼的大缺损的剩余亚单位来遵循经典亚单位原则。许多外科医生在小和中缺损中修改亚单位原则。