Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos Inmunológicos/uso terapéutico , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/prevención & control , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/prevención & control , Xerodermia Pigmentosa/tratamiento farmacológico , Adolescente , Adulto , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/uso terapéutico , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/etiología , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/patología , Femenino , Humanos , Ipilimumab/uso terapéutico , Masculino , Neoplasias Cutáneas/etiología , Neoplasias Cutáneas/patología , Resultado del Tratamiento , Xerodermia Pigmentosa/complicaciones , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Despite the resurgence in regional flap use, otolaryngology resident regional flap experience has been incompletely studied. We sought to characterize United States (US) otolaryngology resident exposure to, and perceptions of, supraclavicular flaps (SCFs), submental flaps (SMFs), and other regional flaps. METHODS: An online survey was disseminated every two weeks to 106 US otolaryngology residency program directors for distribution to residents within their programs between August and October 2016. 121 surveys were returned of which 106 were sufficiently completed and eligible for data analysis. RESULTS: Among residents with adequate responses, 52 were postgraduate year (PGY) 1-3 (junior) residents and 54 were PGY 4-7 (senior) residents. Senior residents participated in more pectoralis major flaps (mean: 8.1, 95%-CI: 6.5-9.8) compared to SCFs (mean: 1.5, 95%-CI: 1.0-2.0, pâ¯<â¯0.001) and SMFs (mean: 0.7; 95%-CI: 0.4-1.0, pâ¯<â¯0.001). Among senior residents exposed to SCFs, SMFs and pectoralis flaps, more individuals judged pectoralis major flaps as successful or very successful (96.2%, 95%-CI: 91.1-100%), compared to SCFs (64.3%, 95%-CI: 46.5-82.0%; pâ¯<â¯0.001) and SMFs (63.2%, 95%-CI: 41.5-84.8%; pâ¯=â¯0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Senior otolaryngology residents were exposed to fewer SCFs and SMFs compared to pectoralis major flaps. Resident perception that SCFs and SMFs were not as successful as pectoralis major flaps should be investigated further.
Asunto(s)
Competencia Clínica , Educación de Postgrado en Medicina/métodos , Colgajos Tisulares Libres/trasplante , Otolaringología/educación , Procedimientos de Cirugía Plástica/educación , Intervalos de Confianza , Femenino , Colgajos Tisulares Libres/clasificación , Rechazo de Injerto , Supervivencia de Injerto , Neoplasias de Cabeza y Cuello/cirugía , Humanos , Internado y Residencia/métodos , Masculino , Colgajo Miocutáneo/trasplante , Evaluación de Necesidades , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
Plunging ranula with prestyloid parapharyngeal space, masticator space, and parotid gland extension. INTRODUCTION: Ranulas develop from mucous extravasation secondary to sublingual gland duct obstruction or trauma. Plunging ranula usually dive into the submandibular space. METHODS: This is the first reported case of a plunging ranula with direct extension to the prestyloid parapharyngeal space, masticator space, and parotid gland with avoidance of the submandibular space. RESULTS: The patient presented with a tender parotid mass, of which the differential is broad, including parotitis, parotid malignancy, metastatic malignancy, lymphoma, as well as other infectious etiologies. When an intraoral component is not identified, other differential considerations would be thyroglossal duct cyst, branchial cleft cyst, parathyroid cyst, cervical thymic cyst, dermoid cyst, cystic hygroma, or benign teratoma. CONCLUSION: The case is unique due to ranula extension into multiple spaces. For optimal treatment, the sublingual gland along with its tract and contents needs to completely removed.
