Husain Ali Khan

Microsurgical Repair of the Inferior Alveolar Nerve: Success Rate and Factors That Adversely Affect Outcome

PURPOSE The objectives of this study were to determine the likelihood of regaining functional sensory recovery (FSR) after microsurgical repair of the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN), and which variables significantly affected the outcome of that surgery in a large series of patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS This was a retrospective cohort study that evaluated all patients who had undergone microsurgical repair of the IAN by 1 of the senior surgeons (R.A.M.) from March 1986 through December 2005. The requirements for inclusion of a patient in the study included the availability of a complete chart record and a final follow-up visit at least 12 months after surgery. All other patients were excluded. The predictor variables were categorized as demographic, etiologic, and operative. The final outcome variable was the level of recovery of sensory function as determined by standardized neurosensory testing at the last postoperative visit of each patient and based on guidelines established by the Medical Research Council Scale. Risk factors for surgical failure to achieve useful sensory function were determined from analysis of descriptive statistics, including patient age, patient gender, etiology of nerve injury, chief sensory complaint (numbness, pain, or both), time from injury to surgical intervention (in months), intraoperative findings, and surgical procedure. Logistic regression methods and associated odds ratios were used to quantify the association between the risk factors and improvement. Receiver operator characteristic curve analysis was used to find the threshold of those variables that significantly affected patient outcome. RESULTS In total, 167 patients (41 male and 126 female patients; mean age, 38.7 years [range, 15-75 years]) underwent 186 IAN repairs (19 patients sustained bilateral IAN injuries). The mean time from injury until surgery was 10.7 months (range, 0-72 months). Successful recovery from neurosensory dysfunction (FSR, defined by the Medical Research Council Scale as ranging from useful sensory function to complete sensory recovery) was observed in 152 repaired IANs (81.7%). With increasing duration from date of injury to IAN repair, the likelihood of FSR decreased (odds ratio, 0.898; P < .001). The odds of achieving FSR exhibited a linear decline between the date of nerve injury and its repair, with a significant drop in rate of successful outcome (FSR) occurring beginning at 12 months after injury. There was also a significant negative relationship between increasing patient age and improvement (odds ratio, 0.97; P = .015), with a threshold drop of achieving FSR at 51 years of age. The cause of the injury, the operative findings, and the type of operation performed to repair the nerve had no significant effect on the likelihood of the patient regaining FSR. The presence of pain after nerve injury did not affect the likelihood of achieving FSR after repair in a statistically significant manner (P = .08). In those patients who did not have pain as a major complaint before nerve repair, pain did not develop after microneurosurgery. CONCLUSIONS Microsurgical repair of an IAN injury resulted in successful restoration of an acceptable level of neurosensory function (FSR) in most patients (152 of 186 repairs [81.7%]) in this study. The likelihood of regaining FSR was inversely related to both time between the injury and its repair and increasing patient age, with significant threshold drops at 12 months after nerve injury and at 51 years of age, respectively.

An Analysis of 101 Primary Cosmetic Rhinoplasties

PURPOSE Primary cosmetic rhinoplasty is one of the most complex of cosmetic surgical procedures in the maxillofacial area that requires precise consideration to both form and function. The complex and variable anatomy, highly visible position of the nose, and distinct patient desires contribute to the complexity of this procedure. This study reports the combined results of 101 consecutive primary cosmetic rhinoplasties at 2 centers. PATIENTS AND METHODS A retrospective chart review was completed on all patients who had primary cosmetic rhinoplasty with or without septoplasty and who were operated on by the senior authors (S.C.B. and H.M.) from June 2006 through December 2008. A standard physical examination, including photo documentation, was completed on each patient preoperatively. All patients were followed periodically after surgery for at least 12 months. Outcome was measured by both subjective and objective measures of cosmetic and functional (breathing) outcome. The following data were collected and analyzed: age of patient, gender, chief cosmetic and functional complaint, details of surgical procedure (including septoplasty, grafts, and donor sites), complications, and report of subjective outcome at final evaluation. RESULTS One hundred one patients (n = 101, average age 24.4 ± 6.8 years old) were enrolled in the study. Most patients presented for consultation regarding cosmetic rhinoplasty (80%) versus septorhinoplasty (20%). Although most of the patients (63%) were treated with septorhinoplasty, the open rhinoplasty (transcollumellar) incision was used in 61% of patients versus the closed rhinoplasty (39%) technique. The most commonly performed combination of techniques used was the combination of nasal tip modification, with dorsal reduction and nasal osetotomies (54%), followed by tip modification with dorsal reduction (19%), and dorsal reduction with osteotomies (18%) and no tip modification. In the 50 patients who required a graft, in 80% the donor site was the nasal septum. Spreader grafts were used in 14% of patients, and a combination of shield/tip graft was used in 52%. The following complications were observed: unhappy patient 16%, dehiscence at incision 5%, asymmetry requiring revision 6%, and infection 1%. In the 63 patients that had septoplasty, 6 (9.5%) reported that their breathing was not improved. In this series 11 patients (11%) received a revision rhinoplasty. CONCLUSIONS Primary cosmetic rhinoplasty is 1 of the more complex facial cosmetic procedures. The vast majority of complications can be avoided with careful and extensive treatment planning. In this series we found a complication and revision rate similar to that reported in the literature.

Rhinoplasty: current therapy.

This is a comprehensive update of rhinoplasty for the oral and maxillofacial surgeon! Topics include: basics of primary cosmetic rhinoplasty, facial analysis, anatomy of the nose for rhinoplasty, septoplasty in conjunction with cosmetic rhinoplasty, grafting techniques and materials for rhinoplasty, nasal tip modifications, correction of the crooked nose, endonasal rhinoplasty, revision rhinoplasty and challenging cases, ethnic rhinoplasty, history of rhinoplasty, and more.

Rhinoplasty: initial consultation and examination.

Many cosmetic surgeons consider rhinoplasty to be the most complex surgical and artistically challenging of all aesthetic surgery today. It is the most common facial procedure performed for women and the second most common for men. The art and science of cosmetic rhinoplasty begins with the initial examination. The surgeon must visualize and predict like Leonardo Da Vinci, be a sculptor like Michelangelo, and be an analyzer like Einstein. This article describes the components and complexities of the initial examination in cosmetic rhinoplasty.