Unveiling the Impact of Three-Dimensional Technology on Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

This study aimed to investigate the impact of three-dimensional (3D) technology on preoperative evaluation for rhinoplasty.A systematic search was conducted on Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. Studies that utilized 3D technology in preoperative assessment for rhinoplasty were included. The primary outcome was surgeon and patient satisfaction. The secondary outcomes included nasal function, cost-efficiency, reoperation rate, precision, and surgical time.Twelve studies (595 patients) were included. Surgeons reported higher satisfaction with 3D approaches based on precision and postoperative results. Patients expressed satisfaction with the 3D approaches due to a better understanding of the procedure and the ability to discuss with the surgeons planning the procedure and participating in postoperative design. The 3D approaches demonstrated higher surgeon satisfaction (mean difference -0.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.20 to -0.06, p = 0.0002), particularly in revision cases, and provided higher precision compared with the two-dimensional (2D) approaches. However, 3D technology was more expensive and not cost-efficient. There were no significant differences in reoperation rate (odds ratio 0.16, 95% CI 0.02-1.36, p = 0.09) and surgical time. Postoperative nasal function showed inconsistent results.3D technology offered higher surgeon satisfaction and increased precision compared with 2D imaging. However, 3D imaging was expensive and not cost-efficient. Reoperation rate and surgical time were comparable, while postoperative nasal function outcomes showed inconsistent results.

Cyanoacrylate Tissue Adhesives Compared With Sutures on Facial and Neck Wounds: A Meta-analysis.

Objective: To compare the effectiveness between cyanoacrylate tissue adhesives (CTAs) and sutures for skin closure on the face and neck. Data Sources: Embase, Medline, Scopus, Central, Web of Science. Review Methods: Randomized controlled trials comparing CTAs versus sutures for skin closure on the face and neck were included. Primary outcomes were cosmetic outcomes. Secondary outcomes were scar depth, scar width, pain, closure time, cost, and adverse events. Subgroup analyses were performed by wound locations, type of CTAs, type of sutures, age groups, and type of wounds. Physicians and patients evaluated the cosmetic outcomes. Results: Eighteen studies (1020 patients) were included. CTAs offered better cosmetic outcomes by Wound Registry Scale at ≤1 month (physician: mean difference [MD]: -1.50, 95% confidence interval, CI: -2.42 to -0.58). The cosmetic outcomes assessed by Visual Analog Scale were comparable at >1 to ≤3 months (physicians: standard mean difference [SMD], -0.01, 95% CI, -0.25 to 0.23, patients: SMD, -0.02, 95% CI, -0.84 to 0.79). The cosmetic outcomes by the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale favored sutures at >3 to 12 months (physician: MD 4.26, 95% CI, 2.02-6.50). Subgroup analyses revealed no differences. CTAs offered less scar depth, scar width, pain, closure time, and total cost of closure. Adverse events were similar. Conclusion: Based on the wound healing process, the cosmetic outcomes exhibited a favorable inclination toward CTAs at <1 month while demonstrating comparable results between CTAs and sutures at >1 to ≤3 months. Subsequently, sutures exhibited superior cosmetic outcomes compared to CTAs at >3 to 12 months.

The efficacy of corticosteroid after facial nerve neurorrhaphy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The benefit of corticosteroids following facial nerve neurorrhaphy in the setting of complete transection is questionable. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate corticosteroid efficacy on facial nerve regeneration and functional recovery after complete disruption and neurorrhaphy. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials on both human and animal models from Ovid MEDLINE and Ovid EMBASE studying corticosteroid efficacy in complete facial nerve disruption followed by neurorrhaphy were included. Data were extracted and pooled for meta-analysis. The outcomes were evaluated from electrophysiology, histology, and functional recovery. However, no randomized controlled trial in human was performed. Possibly, performing human trials with histopathology may not be feasible in clinical setting. RESULTS: Six animal studies (248 participants) met inclusion criteria. Electrophysiologic outcomes revealed no differences in latency (Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) = -1.97, 95% CI -7.38 to 3.44, p = 0.47) and amplitude (SMD = 0.37, 95% CI -0.44 to 1.18, p = 0.37) between systemic corticosteroids and controls. When analysis compared topical corticosteroid and control, the results provided no differences in latency (Mean Difference (MD) = 0.10, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.24, p = 0.16) and amplitude (SMD = 0.01, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.10, p = 0.81). In histologic outcomes, the results showed no differences in axon diameter (MD = 0.13, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.41, p = 0.37) between systemic corticosteroid and control; however, the result in myelin thickness (MD = 0.06, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.08, p < 0.05) favored control group. When comparing systemic corticosteroid with control in eye blinking, the results favored control (MD = 1.33, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.06, p =  0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: This evidence did not show potential benefits of systemic or topical corticosteroid deliveries after facial nerve neurorrhaphy in complete transection when evaluating electrophysiologic, histologic, and functional recovery outcomes in animal models.

The efficacy of corticosteroid after facial nerve neurorrhaphy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial

Abstract Objectives: The benefit of corticosteroids following facial nerve neurorrhaphy in the setting of complete transection is questionable. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate corticosteroid efficacy on facial nerve regeneration and functional recovery after complete disruption and neurorrhaphy. Methods: Randomized controlled trials on both human and animal models from Ovid MEDLINE and Ovid EMBASE studying corticosteroid efficacy in complete facial nerve disruption followed by neurorrhaphy were included. Data were extracted and pooled for meta-analysis. The outcomes were evaluated from electrophysiology, histology, and functional recovery. However, no randomized controlled trial in human was performed. Possibly, performing human trials with histopathology may not be feasible in clinical setting. Results: Six animal studies (248 participants) met inclusion criteria. Electrophysiologic outcomes revealed no differences in latency (Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) = −1.97, 95% CI −7.38 to 3.44, p = 0.47) and amplitude (SMD = 0.37, 95% CI −0.44 to 1.18, p = 0.37) between systemic corticosteroids and controls. When analysis compared topical corticosteroid and control, the results provided no differences in latency (Mean Difference (MD)=0.10, 95% CI −0.04 to 0.24, p = 0.16) and amplitude (SMD = 0.01, 95% CI −0.08 to 0.10, p = 0.81). In histologic outcomes, the results showed no differences in axon diameter (MD = 0.13, 95% CI −0.15 to 0.41, p = 0.37) between systemic corticosteroid and control; however, the result in myelin thickness (MD = 0.06, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.08, p < 0.05) favored control group. When comparing systemic corticosteroid with control in eye blinking, the results favored control (MD= 1.33, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.06, p = 0.0004). Conclusions: This evidence did not show potential benefits of systemic or topical corticosteroid deliveries after facial nerve neurorrhaphy in complete transection when evaluating electrophysiologic, histologic, and functional recovery outcomes in animal models.