Crossing Borders: 95. Jahresversammlung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Hals-Nasen-Ohren-Heilkunde, Kopf- und Hals-Chirurgie vom 8. bis 11. Mai 2024 in Essen. / Crossing Borders: 95. Jahresversammlung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Hals-Nasen-Ohren-Heilkunde, Kopf- und Hals-Chirurgie vom 8. bis 11. Mai 2024 in Essen.

Dear colleagues,Dear readers,We are constantly developing innovative solutions and treatment concepts for our patients in our discipline. In this context, interdisciplinary collaboration is essential. The conference motto "Crossing Borders: interdisciplinary, international, interactive" of the 95th Annual Meeting of the German Society of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery emphasizes the relevance of interdisciplinary cooperation and global exchange. This year, joint meetings with the European Laryngological Society (ELS) and the Rhinoplasty Society of Europe (RSE) will take place for the first time. The American Academy of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) and the Confederation of European Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery (CEORL-HNS) are also involved in the scientific program. The interdisciplinary presentations offer insights into the most recent developments in the fields of head and neck oncology, skull base and orbital surgery, among others. They are a great opportunity to expand your own knowledge and exchange the latest research findings.

Surgery is better than nasal sprays for people with severely blocked airways caused by septal deviation.

The studyCarrie S, O'Hara J, Fouweather T, et al. Clinical effectiveness of septoplasty versus medical management for nasal airways obstruction: multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2023;383:e075445.To read the full NIHR Alert, go to: https://evidence.nihr.ac.uk/alert/surgery-is-better-than-nasal-sprays-for-people-with-severely-blocked-airways/.

Economic impact analysis of a minimally invasive temperature-controlled radiofrequency device versus nasal surgery for the treatment of nasal airway obstruction in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the economic impact of a minimally invasive temperature-controlled radiofrequency (TCRF) device for treating nasal airway obstruction (NAO). METHODS: A budget impact model was developed for two scenarios: a reference scenario of functional rhinoplasty surgery with concomitant septoplasty and inferior turbinate reduction (ITR) performed in the hospital outpatient department where TCRF is not an available treatment option and a new scenario consisting of in-office TCRF treatment of the nasal valve and ITR. A payor perspective was adopted with a hypothetical population plan size of one million members. Costs were estimated over a time horizon of 4 years. The eligible population included patients with severe/extreme NAO and nasal valve collapse (NVC) as the primary cause or significant contributor. Data inputs were sourced from targeted literature reviews. Uncertainty within the model structure and input parameters was assessed using one-way sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: The introduction of a TCRF device resulted in population-level cost savings of $20,015,123 and per-responder average cost savings of $3531 through a 4-year time horizon due to lower procedure costs and complication rates of the device relative to the surgical comparator. Results were robust when varying parameter values in sensitivity analyses, with cost savings being most sensitive to the prevalence of NAO and estimated response rates to functional rhinoplasty and TCRF. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe/extreme NAO, with NVC as the primary or major contributor, introducing TCRF with ITR as a treatment option demonstrates the potential for significant cost savings over functional rhinoplasty with septoplasty and ITR.

Nasal valve dysfunction is a common cause of nasal airway obstruction (NAO) that has a significant impact on heath and quality of life for affected individuals. Previously, patients were offered temporary measures or a type of surgery called functional rhinoplasty which is a highly complex surgery that can be costly, requires recovery time, and in rare cases, not be successful. Recently, a new minimally invasive treatment alternative for NAO called temperature-controlled radiofrequency (TCRF) that may be performed in a surgery center or a doctor's office has become available. This paper provides the results of budget impact analysis performed to assess whether adding the TCRF procedure in place of surgery as a choice for patients with NAO will result in cost savings to an insurance payer with 1 million covered individuals in the United States over a period of 4 years. Results show that TCRF may result in an average of 9,416 fewer rhinoplasty surgeries, provide an average 4-year cost-savings of $3,531 for every patient that responds to TCRF treatment, and a savings of $20,015,123 over 4 years for the insurance provider. These potential cost savings over 4 years would likely be due to reduced procedure costs and complication rates compared to surgery.

Impact of Intranasal Splint Removal Time on Postoperative Complications after Septoplasty.

BACKGROUND: Various types of nasal tampons are used for packing after septoplasty. Intranasal splints are widely used as they are more advantageous than other materials regarding the lower complication rates of synechia, and lesser pain during removal. However, there is no consensus on the timing of intranasal splint removal after septoplasty operations. AIM: In this study, we aimed to investigate the effects of removal time of intranasal splints on postoperative complications after septoplasty. METHODS: One hundred patients who had septoplasty were randomly divided into two groups according to splint removal time. In group I, the splints were removed on the third postoperative day and in group II, splints were removed on the seventh postoperative day. Pain during splint removal was evaluated by visual analog scale (VAS). Complications of hemorrhage, septal hematoma, crusting, mucosal injury, and infection were recorded during splint removal and compared. In the first postoperative month, hemorrhage, crusting, mucosal injury, infection, synechia, and in the second postoperative month, synechia and perforation rates were compared between two groups. RESULTS: Mucosal crusting was significantly higher in group II during splint removal. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding the complication rates and pain scores. Our findings showed no significant difference in pain scores during splint removal and postoperative complications between the two groups except for mucosal crusting. CONCLUSION: Based on our findings, although there is no consensus on the optimal time for splint removal, earlier removal of splints can be considered a favorable option after septoplasty operations.

Comparative study between remifentanil (or fentanyl) and dexmedetomidine for the analgesia of rhinoplasty: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Remifentanil (or fentanyl) and dexmedetomidine may have some potential to improve the analgesia of rhinoplasty, and this meta-analysis aims to compare their efficacy for the analgesia of rhinoplasty. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched, and we included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the analgesic effect of remifentanil (or fentanyl) versus dexmedetomidine for rhinoplasty. RESULTS: Four RCTs were finally included in the meta-analysis. In patients undergoing rhinoplasty, remifentanil (or fentanyl) infusion and dexmedetomidine infusion resulted in similar good patient satisfaction (odd ratio [OR] = 2.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.63 to 11.64; P = .18), good surgeon satisfaction (OR = 1.68; 95% CI = 0.02 to 181.40; P = .83), extubation time (mean difference [MD] = 7.56; 95% CI = -11.00 to 26.12; P = .42), recovery time (MD = -2.25; 95% CI = -23.41 to 18.91; P = .83), additional analgesic requirement (OR = 0.16; 95% CI = 0 to 8.65; P = .37) and adverse events (OR = 8.50; 95% CI = 0.47 to 153.30; P = .15). CONCLUSIONS: Remifentanil (or fentanyl) and dexmedetomidine may have comparable analgesia for patients undergoing rhinoplasty.

Pollybeak deformity in rhinoplasty: prevention and treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with pollybeak deformity who underwent rhinoplasty were analyzed retrospectively and across centers to identify their primary risk factors, preventative measures, and treatment modalities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The retrospective data of 100 pollybeak deformity cases (61 males and 39 females) were enrolled in our study. The causes leading to pollybeak deformity were evaluated and classified as (1) Over-resected bony dorsum, (2) Excessive supra tip scarring, and (3) Inefficient tip support causing an under-projected tip. The treatments applied to patients with pollybeak deformity were retrospectively evaluated and classified as (1) Triamcinolone acetonide injections (one or two injections), (2) Filler injection over the bony dorsum to balance, (3) Using a graft to achieve the desired nose shape, (4) Trimming down the excessive supra tip soft tissue and/or tip cartilage, and (5) Enforcing the tip support. RESULTS: Our results showed that the major cause of pollybeak deformity was excessive supra-tip scarring (48%). The other reasons are inefficient tip support, causing an under-projected tip (28%), and over-resected bony dorsum (24%). The modalities for the treatment of pollybeak deformity were (1) Trimming down the excessive supra tip soft tissue and/or tip cartilage (30%), (2) Triamcinolone acetonide injections (one or two injections) (28%), or (3) Enforcing the tip support (28%), (4) Using a graft to achieve the desired nose shape (14%) and (5) Filler injection over the bony dorsum to balance (6%). In some patients, more than one treatment modality was applied. Triamcinolone acetonide or filler injections were the non-surgical therapies for pollybeak deformities. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that excessive supra-tip scarring is not directly related to a surgical error but rather depends on the patient and tissue healing. Care should be taken to avoid over-resecting the bony dorsum. Tip support should be provided to prevent inefficient tip support from causing an under-projected tip. However, efforts should be made to minimize supra-tip dead space and possibly proceeding pollybeak formation through proper bandaging.

The Two-Stage Folded Paramedian Forehead Flap Without Cartilage Grafts for Full Thickness Distal Nasal Defects: A Review of 35 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Full thickness defects of the ala, soft triangle, and nasal tip involving the nasal lining have traditionally been repaired with the three-stage folded paramedian forehead flap (FPFF), with a cartilage graft for support. For similar defects, the authors utilize the two-stage FPFF without cartilaginous support which provides reproducible functional and aesthetic results.  Objective: To describe the authors’ experience with the two-stage FPFF, including outcomes, complications, and design modifications to enhance functional and aesthetic success.  Methods: An IRB-approved retrospective database review of FPFF was performed at two sites. Using postoperative photographs, outcomes were assessed by blinded non-investigator dermatologist raters using a modified observer scar assessment scale. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were reconstructed using the two-stage FPFF without cartilage grafts. Subjective assessment of scar vascularity, pigment, relief, and thickness by 3 independent reviewers yielded an overall cosmesis score of 8.4±1.9 (out of 40). CONCLUSION: The two-stage FPFF without cartilage grafts is a reliable, cosmetically elegant repair that can provide optimal functional and aesthetic results for complex unilateral distal nose defects.J Drugs Dermatol. 2024;23(4): doi:10.36849/JDD.7358.

Decision Making in Nasal Reconstruction: When to Use the Forehead Flap?

In this review, the paramedian forehead flap indications and uses are reviewed, specifically examining clinical situations where patient selection is important. In these settings, a preoperative discussion with a patient regarding surgical expectations and goals in the setting of their defect is paramount. The authors review the literature regarding the psychosocial aspects of major nasal reconstruction and review preoperative discussion points that are key to a well-informed patient and improved patient satisfaction through the nasal reconstructive process.

Nasal Reconstruction of Large Defects Without a Forehead Flap.

Defects over 2.0 to 2.5 cm may often require repair with a multistaged forehead flap. However, in some such defects, other options may be available. In this article, the author will review some of these options.

Implications of Malignancy, Radiation, and Timing of Major Nasal Reconstruction.

Owing to the complex, multilayered anatomy of the nose in the central face, major nasal reconstruction can pose a significant challenge for reconstructive surgeons. It is the responsibility of reconstructive surgeons to have an understanding of the most common cutaneous malignancies and excisional techniques that may lead to complex nasal defects. The purpose of this article is to discuss these malignancies, excisional techniques, and impacts of radiation on tissue that has implications for reconstructive surgeons.

Nasal Lining Reconstruction with Prelaminated Forehead Flap.

A successful nasal reconstruction relies heavily on a stable internal lining. Larger defects pose unique challenges for internal lining reconstruction as obtaining tissue of adequate size while maintaining airway patency is difficult. The prelamination technique uses a staged skin graft to the paramedian forehead flap prior to transfer. As such, a composite flap can be later transferred to reconstruct internal and external nasal defects concomitantly. This article reviews the current background, techniques, and clinical considerations in the use of the prelaminated forehead flap for nasal lining reconstruction in partial to total nasal defects.

Total Nasal Reconstruction: Advances in Free Tissue Transfer for Internal Lining and Structural Support.

Total nasal reconstruction is a complex challenge due to the need to establish new internal lining, internal structural support, and external skin covering that is both functional and esthetic. The medial femoral condyle corticoperiosteal free flap represents an innovative option for restoration internal structure and internal nasal lining. When used in conjunction with a paramedian forehead flap, acceptable results in both function and esthetics can be achieved.

Structural Support for Large to Total Nasal Reconstruction.

When large defects of the nose are present, it is imperative to address all 3 layers: the external skin envelope, the osteocartilaginous support, and the inner mucosal lining. The middle structural framework is the primary factor in determining the overall shape of the nose, in addition to facilitating a functional and patent airway. As such, its reconstruction must be robust enough to provide lasting osteocartilaginous support while minimizing disfiguring bulk. The goal is replacement of missing tissue with grafts of similar strength, size, and shape. This article will review approaches to the reconstruction of structural support in large nasal defects.

Nuances in Forehead Flap Reconstruction for Large Nasal Defects.

The forehead flap is a time-tested and robust resurfacing flap used for nasal reconstruction. Owing to its excellent color and texture match, acceptable donor site morbidity, and robust and independent blood supply that can support both structural and internal lining grafts, this flap remains the workhorse flap for resurfacing large nasal defects. Various nuances of this technique relating to defect and template preparation, flap design, flap elevation, flap inset, donor site closure, and pedicle division are discussed in this article. These nuances are the guiding principles for improved outcomes using a forehead flap for the reconstruction of large nasal defects.

Nasal Lining Reconstruction with Loco-regional Flaps.

The reliability of local intranasal flaps speaks to the robust vascularity of the nose, which these flaps are based on. The goals for lining replacement, as in any other area of head and neck reconstruction, is to use tissue that best matches the qualities of what is being replaced. The goal of this review is to describe the extent to which local tissues can be used and when to consider regional flaps when the extent of a local flap will not provide enough coverage.

Reconstruction of Large Composite Defects Extending Beyond the Nose.

Nasal reconstruction remains one of the most challenging surgeries for facial plastic and reconstructive surgeons. The addition of defects extending beyond the nose adds a layer of complexity to an already technically demanding surgery. This article will focus on the management of composite defects extending beyond the boundaries of the nose. Surgeons need to have a variety of techniques at their disposal. These complex defects often require multiple local flaps, multiple stages, and, in select cases, free tissue transfer.