Archives of Craniofacial Surgery (대한두개안면성형외과학회지)

Korean Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association (대한두개안면성형외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Long-term postoperative satisfaction and complications in nasal bone fracture patients according to fracture type, site, and severity

  • Choi, Min Hyub (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Chosun University College of Medicine) ;
  • Cheon, Ji Seon (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Chosun University College of Medicine) ;
  • Son, Kyung Min (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Chosun University College of Medicine) ;
  • Cho, Woo Young (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Chosun University College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2019.10.26
  • Accepted : 2019.11.22
  • Published : 2020.02.20
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: It is difficult to completely fix nasal bone fractures with closed reduction, as it is often accompanied by septal cartilage damage, and this often results in postoperative secondary deformities. Thus, patients are often reluctant to undergo closed reduction surgery. The present study aimed to evaluate aesthetic and functional satisfaction, as well as satisfaction with and complications of closed reduction, according to nasal bone fracture type. Methods: The subjects were patients who underwent closed reduction under general anesthesia from January 2017 to December 2018. Based on the modified Murray classification, patients were classified into five groups according to the fracture site, septal fracture, and deviation. A total of 211 patients were sent a web-based survey on postoperative satisfaction and complications, as well as intention for revision and cosmetic surgery. Sixty-one patients (28.9%) responded. Results: There were no significant differences in aesthetic and functional satisfaction or satisfaction with closed reduction according to the fracture type, site, or severity. Postoperative functional complications developed in 14 of 61 patients (22.95%). With 10 out of 24 (41.67%) patients (p = 0.044), the bilateral fracture with septal fracture or prominent septal deviation type had a higher incidence of complications than the other types. Conclusion: The incidence of complications is higher for bilateral fracture with septal fracture or prominent septal deviation compared to the other nasal bone fracture types. Therefore, long-term follow-up after closed reduction surgery for this fracture type can aid in establishing additional postoperative treatment plans and improving patient satisfaction.

Keywords

References

  1. Rhee SC, Kim YK, Cha JH, Kang SR, Park HS. Septal fracture in simple nasal bone fracture. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004;113:45-52. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000096705.64545.69
  2. Farber SJ, Nguyen DC, Parikh RP, Jang JL, Woo AS. Improving results in closed nasal reduction: a protocol for reducing secondary deformity. Plast Reconstr Surg 2017;139:51-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000002847
  3. Rohrich RJ, Adams WP Jr. Nasal fracture management: minimizing secondary nasal deformities. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000;106:266-73. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-200008000-00003
  4. Murray JA, Maran AG. The treatment of nasal injuries by manipulation. J Laryngol Otol 1980;94:1405-10. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022215100090241
  5. Sam A, Deshmukh PT, Patil C, Jain S, Patil R. Nasal septal deviation and external nasal deformity: a correlative study of 100 cases. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012;64:312-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-011-0311-x
  6. Oh HK, Park YJ, Kim HS, Ryu JY, Kook MS, Park HJ, et al. A recent 5-year retrospective study on nasal bone fracture. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008;34:230-6.
  7. Hung T, Chang W, Vlantis AC, Tong MC, van Hasselt CA. Patient satisfaction after closed reduction of nasal fractures. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2007;9:40-3. https://doi.org/10.1001/archfaci.9.1.40
  8. Yilmaz MS, Guven M, Varli AF. Nasal fractures: is closed reduction satisfying? J Craniofac Surg 2013;24:e36-8.
  9. Kang CM, Han DG. Correlation between operation result and patient satisfaction of nasal bone fracture. Arch Craniofac Surg 2017;18:25-9. https://doi.org/10.7181/acfs.2017.18.1.25
  10. Murray JA, Maran AG, Busuttil A, Vaughan G. A pathological classification of nasal fractures. Injury 1986;17:338-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-1383(86)90159-2
  11. Higuera S, Lee EI, Cole P, Hollier LH Jr, Stal S. Nasal trauma and the deviated nose. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007;120:64S-75S. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000260722.91183.50
  12. Staffel JG. Optimizing treatment of nasal fractures. Laryngoscope 2002;112:1709-19. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005537-200210000-00001
  13. Ridder GJ, Boedeker CC, Fradis M, Schipper J. Technique and timing for closed reduction of isolated nasal fractures: a retrospective study. Ear Nose Throat J 2002;81:49-54. https://doi.org/10.1177/014556130208100116
  14. Kang CM, Han DG. Objective outcomes of closed reduction according to the type of nasal bone fracture. Arch Craniofac Surg 2017;18:30-6. https://doi.org/10.7181/acfs.2017.18.1.30

Cited by

  1. Quality of life of patients with nasal bone fracture after closed reduction vol.21, pp.5, 2020, https://doi.org/10.7181/acfs.2020.00507
  2. Etiology, pattern, and treatment of nose fractures: A 10-year cross-sectional cohort retrospective study vol.24, pp.11, 2021, https://doi.org/10.4103/njcp.njcp_52_21
  3. Comparison of the outcomes of nasal bone reduction using serial imaging vol.22, pp.4, 2020, https://doi.org/10.7181/acfs.2021.00311