Clinical Practice Patterns and Evidence-Based Medicine in Secondary Cleft Rhinoplasty: A 14-Year Review of Maintenance of Certification Tracer Data From the American Board of Plastic Surgery

Secondary cleft lip rhinoplasty. Our experience of two decades

Patients who underwent cleft lip surgery in childhood may develop nasal malformation later in life. Various procedures have been described to correct these malformations. This study aims to describe our surgical approach and assess the morphometric outcomes of secondary cleft-lip rhinoplasty performed at the plastic surgery department in Marseille between 2002 and 2022. We conducted an analysis of surgical procedures and nasal morphometrics results by measuring pre- and postoperative images. Both surgical procedures and nasal morphometric analyses have been performed. This study included 43 patients, with 70% presenting unilateral cleft lip and 30% bilateral cleft-lip. An open approach was performed in 90% of cases. Regarding the surgical steps, a tip rhinoplasty, tip reinforcement, and crus lateral reinforcement by cartilage grafting was performed in 98%, 96%, and 32% of cases. A septal extension graft, a columellar strut, and a "tongue in groove" technique were performed in 54%, 33%, and 4% of cases, respectively, to reinforce the tip. Cartilage harvested from the nasal septum, ribs, and ear was utilized in 44%, 23%, and 20% of cases. An osteotomy, septoplasty associated with a spreader-flap, alar base reduction, and alar to triangular cartilage fixation were performed in 67%, 79%, 16%, and 16% of cases. All pre- and postoperative nasal morphometrics measurements have demonstrated a statistical significant improvement in nasal morphology following surgery. An open approach rhinoplasty, facilitating alar cartilage dissection and reinforcement by septal, rib, or ear cartilage is crucial to preserve postoperative outcomes. Our technique enables favorable mid-term results on secondary cleft-lip rhinoplasty.

Characterizing Cleft Rhinoplasty Across Skeletal Maturity: A Systematic Review of Terminology and Surgical Techniques

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to assess cleft rhinoplasty terminology across phases of growth.

DESIGN/SETTING

A systematic review was performed on cleft rhinoplasty publications over 20 years.

INTERVENTIONS

Studies were categorized by age at surgical intervention: infant (<1 year); immature (1 to 14 years); mature (>15 years).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Collected data included terminology used and surgical techniques.

RESULTS

The 288 studies included demonstrated a wide range of terminology. In the infant group, 51/54 studies used the term "primary." In the immature group, 7/18 studies used the term "primary," 3/18 used "secondary." In the mature group, 2/33 studies used the term "primary," 16/33 used "secondary," 2/33 used "definitive," 5/33 used terms such as "mature," "adult," and "late," and 8/33 did not use terminology.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUE ASSESSMENT DEMONSTRATED

cleft rhinoplasty at infancy used nostril rim or no nasal incision, immature rhinoplasty used closed and open rhinoplasty incisions; and mature rhinoplasty used a majority of open rhinoplasty. Infant and immature cleft rhinoplasty incorporated septal harvest or spur removal in <10% of cases, whereas these procedures were common in mature rhinoplasty. No studies in infants or immature patients used osteotomies or septal grafts, common techniques in mature rhinoplasty.

CONCLUSIONS

Current terminology for cleft rhinoplasty is varied and inconsistently applied across stages of facial development. However, cleft rhinoplasty performed at infancy, childhood, and facial maturity are surgically distinct procedures. The authors recommend the terminology "infant," "immature," and "mature" cleft rhinoplasty to accurately describe this procedure within the context of skeletal growth.

Clinical Practice Patterns in Facelift Surgery: A 15-Year Review of Continuous Certification Tracer Data from the American Board of Plastic Surgery

BACKGROUND

This study evaluates change in practice patterns in facelift surgery based on a 15-year review of tracer data collected by the American Board of Plastic Surgery as part of the Continuous Certification process.

METHODS

Tracer data for facelift was reviewed from 2006 to 2021. The 15-year collection period was divided into an "early cohort (EC)" from 2006 to 2014 and a "recent cohort (RC)" from 2015 to 2021.

RESULTS

Of 3400 facelifts (1710 EC/1690 RC) performed, 18% were done in hospital and 76% were done in an accredited office facility. Ninety one percent of patients were female with an average age of 61 years. There was an increase in the number of secondary facelifts (4% EC vs 18% RC; p < 0.001) and an increased number of patients concerned about volume loss/deflation (25% EC vs 37% RC; p < 0.001). The surgical approach to the SMAS involved plication (40%), flaps (35%), SMASectomy (22%) and MACS lift (6%). One percent of facelifts were subperiosteal and 8% skin-only. Significantly more surgeons used the lateral SMAS flap (14% EC vs 18% RC, p < 0.005), while less used an extended SMAS flap (21% vs 18%; p = 0.001) and MACS lift (10% EC vs 6% RC; p = 0.021) techniques. The concomitant use of facial fat grafting is becoming more common (15% EC vs 24% RC, p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

A 15-year review of ABPS tracer data provides an excellent venue for the objective assessment of the current status of facelift surgery, and key changes in practice patterns during that time.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Practice Profile of Practicing Plastic Surgeons: A 20-year Review of Plastic Surgery Statistics

Background

Evaluation of practice patterns by American Board of Plastic Surgery (ABPS) diplomates allows for a greater understanding as to how the field is progressing. Understanding evolving procedural trends can give insight into plastic surgeons' subspecialty focus and influence resident training to prepare them for future practice.

Methods

American Society of Plastic Surgeons member only projections for aesthetic and reconstructive procedures were reviewed from 1999 to 2018 in 5-year increments to identify shifts in frequency between the beginning (1999-2003) and end (2014-2018) of the timeframe. Tracer utilization for all four ABPS modules were also examined between 2014 and 2018. Descriptive statistics were performed to identify significant changes (P < 0.05) in subspecialty focus and procedure trends.

Results

Annual procedure incidence between 2014 and 2018 was compared with that between 1999 and 2003. The annual number of procedures more than doubled from 3,244,084 to 6,628,082. Among reconstructive procedures, there was a statistically significant increase in the number of breast reconstruction, breast implant removal, and maxillofacial surgery procedures, and a statistically significant decrease in the number of procedures focused on reconstruction of birth defects, burn injuries, and hand anomalies. In aesthetic surgery, significant increases were seen in the number of augmentation mammoplasty, abdominoplasty, and mastopexy procedures, with significant decreases in the number of blepharoplasty and rhinoplasty procedures.

Conclusions

Understanding the changing practice patterns of ABPS diplomates is essential to define the direction that our specialty is taking over time, and to guide program directors in plastic surgery on areas of focus for appropriate training of plastic surgeons.

Practice Patterns in Primary Breast Augmentation: A 16-Year Review of Continuous Certification Tracer Data from the American Board of Plastic Surgery

BACKGROUND

As part of the continuous certification process, the American Board of Plastic Surgery collects case data for specific tracer procedures in aesthetic surgery to assess practice improvement by the diplomates. These case-based data provide valuable information on national trends in clinical practice. The current study was performed to analyze practice patterns in aesthetic primary breast augmentation.

METHODS

Breast augmentation tracer data were reviewed from 2005 to 2021 and grouped into an early cohort (EC), from 2005 through 2014, and a recent cohort (RC), from 2015 through 2021. Fisher exact tests and two-sample t tests compared demographic characteristics of the patients, surgical techniques, and complication rates.

RESULTS

Patients in the RC were slightly older (34 versus 35 years; P < 0.001), more likely to have ptosis greater than 22 cm (20% versus 23%; P < 0.0001), less likely to smoke (12% versus 8%; P < 0.0001), and less likely to undergo a preoperative mammogram (29% versus 24%; P < 0.0001). From a technical standpoint, inframammary incisions have become more common (68% versus 80%; P < 0.0001), whereas periareolar incision use has decreased (24% versus 14%; P < 0.0001). Submuscular plane placement has increased (22% versus 56%; P < 0.0001), while subglandular placement has decreased (19% versus 7%; P < 0.0001). Silicone implants are most popular (58% versus 82%; P < 0.0001). Textured implant use increased from 2011 (2%) to 2016 (16%), followed by a sharp decline to 0% by 2021. Trends follow U.S. Food and Drug Administration approvals and warnings.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights evolving trends in aesthetic breast augmentation over the past 16 years. The most common technique remains a smooth silicone prosthesis placed in the subpectoral plane through an inframammary incision.

Bony Cartilaginous Graft in Unilateral Cleft Lip Rhinoplasty

BACKGROUND

Cleft rhinoplasty is a challenging form of nasal correction of both esthetic and functional deformities. The septal cartilage in many Asian patients are not sufficient and weak. Does a combination of the septal cartilage and the bony septum have both esthetic and functional benefits to secondary unilateral cleft rhinoplasty?

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty patients with a unilateral cleft lip palate underwent open rhinoplasty from October 2018 to January 2021. After preserving a 10 mm L-strut, the posterior cartilaginous and bony septum were harvested as an integrative unit. The osteocartilaginous graft was used as a caudal septal extension graft and an extended spreader graft. Correcting the asymmetry of the tip and tip projection followed. The intraoperative harvested composite graft was analyzed. Acoustic rhinometry and the 3-dimensional anthropometric measurements of the external nose were assessed before and after surgery.

RESULTS

The osteocartilaginous unit was much larger than the cartilaginous part of this unit. The mean nasal tip height and the nasolabial angle increased significantly after surgery. The measurement of cross-sectional areas and volumes by acoustic rhinometry revealed that septorhinoplasty provided a significant increase in the function of both nasal cavities.

CONCLUSIONS

This septal bony cartilaginous graft is effective for cleft lip nasal deformity when correcting the deviated septum, creating a supporting frame to correct the nasal tip asymmetry, improving function.

The Effect of Arch Cartilage Graft and Tajima Reverse U Approach in the Secondary Reconstruction of Unilateral Cleft Lip Nasal Deformity

ABSTRACT

Secondary cleft lip nasal deformity is complicated with wide spectrum of defect and varied reconstructive procedures. There has been no unanimous solution for a given problem. In case of a localized alar depression in unilateral cleft lip nasal deformity, the conchal cartilage applied as arch graft was proposed. Patients were recruited from database of craniofacial center who received Tajima method and arch cartilage graft. Inclusion criteria were patients with unilateral cleft lip nasal deformity after skeletal maturity. Through a reverse U incision, the lower lateral cartilage was dissected and released from the skin and the contralateral cartilage. The harvested conchal cartilage graft was trimmed to 25 to 30 by 8 mm in size, and inserted as arch shape overlying the cleft side lower lateral cartilage. Transdomal fixation sutures were made. Outcome assessment was performed, and the nostril and alar dimensions were measured. Thirty-nine patients were eligible for evaluation of the surgical outcome. Majority of patients underwent simultaneous lip revision (97%). No surgery-related complications were noted in this series. Satisfaction to the nasal reconstruction was reported in 85% of patients. Further minor nasal revisions were performed in 6 patients (15%). Quantitative measurement showed statistically significant improvement in nostril height, alar height and alar width after the surgery. It is concluded that the Tajima reverse U approach plus arch cartilage graft is an effective method for secondary reconstruction of the unilateral cleft lip nasal deformity in selected patients presenting with cleft side alar depression.