Wilson Gemma C, Dias Laura, Faris Callum
Department of Otolaryngology, Leicester Royal Infirmary, Leicester, England.
Department of Otolaryngology, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, England.
JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2017 Dec 1;19(6):484-489. doi: 10.1001/jamafacial.2017.0163.
Warping of costal cartilage is well described; however, its strength and abundance still make it a desirable graft material, especially in complex reconstructive rhinoplasty. Despite multiple methods of cartilage harvest, carving, and preimplantation treatment being developed over the years, warp remains a challenging clinical problem.
To assess whether the 30° oblique split method of preparing costal cartilage grafts produces less warping of the graft than the current standard of harvesting the central segment of a rib using the concentric carving method.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This in vitro cadaveric study evaluated the warping of costal cartilage grafts using the oblique split method with an angle of 30° or the concentric carving method during a 3-month period beginning in December 2014.
Millimeters of warp from baseline (at 1 hour) and at 1, 2, and 3 months, measured in the frontal and lateral planes.
Among 74 costal cartilage grafts (using the oblique split method with an angle of 30° in 41 and the concentric carving method in 33), the mean amount of warp in the frontal plane was between 1.12 mm (95% CI, 0.96-1.28 mm) and 1.57 mm (95% CI, 0.94-2.20 mm) for the oblique group and between 1.18 mm (95% CI, 0.98-1.38 mm) and 1.29 mm (95% CI, 0.86-1.72 mm) for the concentric group during the 3-month period. There was no statistically significant difference in the frontal plane between the 2 methods at 1 hour (P = .45; 0.10 mm, 95% CI, -0.38 to 0.17 mm), 1 month (P = .32; 0.13 mm, 95% CI, -0.13 to 0.40 mm), 2 months (P = .50; 0.28 mm, 95% CI, -0.55 to 1.11 mm), or 3 months (P = .15; 0.22 mm, 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.52 mm) using the t test, regression analysis, or panel data analysis. Similarly, no significant difference was found in the lateral plane at 1 hour (P = .89; 0.04 mm, 95% CI, -0.49 to 0.56 mm), 1 month (P = .82; 0.07 mm, 95% CI, -0.56 to 0.70 mm), 2 months (P = .29; 0.40 mm, 95% CI, -0.36 to 1.17 mm), or 3 months (P = .63; 0.22 mm, 95% CI, -0.70 to 1.13 mm) using the t test. Two grafts were excluded due to desiccation.
The 30° oblique split and concentric carving methods of costal cartilage graft carving are equivalent in terms of the amount of warp. The oblique split method may be superior because of easier carving and the increased volume of material.
NA.
肋软骨变形已有充分描述;然而,其强度和丰富性使其仍是一种理想的移植材料,尤其是在复杂的鼻整形重建手术中。尽管多年来已开发出多种软骨采集、雕刻和植入前处理方法,但变形仍是一个具有挑战性的临床问题。
评估采用30°斜切法制备肋软骨移植物与目前使用同心雕刻法采集肋骨中央段的标准方法相比,移植物的变形是否更小。
设计、地点和参与者:这项体外尸体研究于2014年12月开始的3个月期间,评估了使用30°斜切法或同心雕刻法的肋软骨移植物的变形情况。
在额面和侧面测量从基线(1小时)以及1、2和3个月时的变形毫米数。
在74个肋软骨移植物中(41个采用30°斜切法,33个采用同心雕刻法),斜切组在3个月期间额面的平均变形量在1.12毫米(95%置信区间,0.96 - 1.28毫米)至1.57毫米(95%置信区间,0.94 - 2.20毫米)之间,同心组在1.18毫米(95%置信区间,0.98 - 1.38毫米)至1.29毫米(95%置信区间,0.86 - 1.72毫米)之间。使用t检验、回归分析或面板数据分析,在1小时(P = 0.45;0.10毫米,95%置信区间, - 0.38至0.17毫米)、1个月(P = 0.32;0.13毫米,95%置信区间, - 0.13至0.40毫米)、2个月(P = 0.50;0.28毫米,95%置信区间, - 0.55至1.11毫米)或3个月(P = 0.15;0.22毫米,95%置信区间, - 0.08至0.52毫米)时,两种方法在额面无统计学显著差异。同样,在1小时(P = 0.89;0.04毫米,95%置信区间, - 0.49至0.56毫米)、1个月(P = 0.82;0.07毫米,95%置信区间, - 0.56至0.70毫米)、2个月(P = 0.29;0.40毫米,95%置信区间, - 0.36至1.17毫米)或3个月(P = 0.63;0.22毫米,95%置信区间, - 0.70至1.13毫米)时,侧面使用t检验未发现显著差异。由于干燥,排除了2个移植物。
肋软骨移植物雕刻的30°斜切法和同心雕刻法在变形量方面相当。斜切法可能更具优势,因为雕刻更容易且材料量增加。
无。