Platysma-based myocutaneous clavicular island flap for intraoral reconstruction.

The clavicular myocutaneous island flap, with circulation provided by the platysma and superficial cervical fascia, was first performed by Paul Tessier in 1970, taking his motivation from the prior experience of John Barron with subcutaneous island flaps. A manuscript written by Dr. Tessier on his experience of 120 cases using the flap (which we will refer to as the BT, or Barron-Tessier flap) has been translated and is presented, as well the experiences of Matthews and Wolfe, who learned the procedure from Dr. Tessier, and Kamerer, an ENT/Head and Neck surgeon who learned the procedure from Matthews. In aggregate, we will present our joint experience with 443 cases of the BT flap. Because of its ease and speed of harvest, reliability, and provision of thin, pliable skin, we feel that, in many instances, it is equivalent, or even superior to microsurgical free flap for reconstruction of intraoral lining defects.

Safety and efficacy of sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation for chronic cluster headache: a double-blind, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic cluster headache is the most disabling form of cluster headache. The mainstay of treatment is attack prevention, but the available management options have little efficacy and are associated with substantial side-effects. In this study, we aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation for treatment of chronic cluster headache. METHODS: We did a randomised, sham-controlled, parallel group, double-blind, safety and efficacy study at 21 headache centres in the USA. We recruited patients aged 22 years or older with chronic cluster headache, who reported a minimum of four cluster headache attacks per week that were unsuccessfully controlled by preventive treatments. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) via an online adaptive randomisation procedure to either stimulation of the sphenopalatine ganglion or a sham control that delivered a cutaneous electrical stimulation. Patients and the clinical evaluator and surgeon were masked to group assignment. The primary efficacy endpoint, which was analysed with weighted generalised estimated equation logistic regression models, was the difference between groups in the proportion of stimulation-treated ipsilateral cluster attacks for which relief from pain was achieved 15 min after the start of stimulation without the use of acute drugs before that timepoint. Efficacy analyses were done in all patients who were implanted with a device and provided data for at least one treated attack during the 4-week experimental phase. Safety was assessed in all patients undergoing an implantation procedure up to the end of the open-label phase of the study, which followed the experimental phase. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02168764. FINDINGS: Between July 9, 2014, and Feb 14, 2017, 93 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, 45 to the sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation group and 48 to the control group. 36 patients in the sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation group and 40 in the control group had at least one attack during the experimental phase and were included in efficacy analyses. The proportion of attacks for which pain relief was experienced at 15 min was 62·46% (95% CI 49·15-74·12) in the sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation group versus 38·87% (28·60-50·25) in the control group (odds ratio 2·62 [95% CI 1·28-5·34]; p=0·008). Nine serious adverse events were reported by the end of the open-label phase. Three of these serious adverse events were related to the implantation procedure (aspiration during intubation, nausea and vomiting, and venous injury or compromise). A fourth serious adverse event was an infection that was attributed to both the stimulation device and the implantation procedure. The other five serious adverse events were unrelated. There were no unanticipated serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation seems efficacious and is well tolerated, and potentially offers an alternative approach to the treatment of chronic cluster headache. Further research is need to clarify its place in clinical practice. FUNDING: Autonomic Technologies.

Top five craniofacial techniques for training in plastic surgery residency.

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing specialization of craniofacial surgery, certain craniofacial techniques are widely applicable. The authors identified five such craniofacial techniques and queried American Society of Plastic Surgeons members and plastic surgery program directors regarding their comfort level with the procedures and their opinion on resident training for these selected procedures. METHODS: First, a select group of senior craniofacial surgeons discussed and agreed on the top five procedures. Second, active American Society of Plastic Surgeons were surveyed regarding their opinion on training and their comfort level with each procedure. Third, plastic surgery residency program directors were studied to see which of the top five procedures are taught as part of the plastic surgery residency curriculum. RESULTS: The top five widely applicable craniofacial procedures are technically described and include the following: (1) cranial or iliac bone graft for nasal reconstruction, (2) perialar rim bone graft, (3) lateral canthopexy, (4) osseous genioplasty, and (5) bone graft harvest for orbital floor defects. For practicing plastic surgeons, comfort level in all procedures increased with advancing years in practice (except those with <5 years). A majority of plastic surgeons (>75 percent), especially those with craniofacial fellowship training, felt competent in all procedures except osseous genioplasty (53 percent). Plastic surgery program directors agreed that all top five procedures should be mastered by graduation. CONCLUSIONS: Although program directors felt that all five selected craniofacial procedures should be taught and mastered during residency training, plastic surgeons without craniofacial fellowship training were less comfortable with the techniques. Residency training goals should include competence in core craniofacial techniques.

The role of TSH receptor antibodies in the management of Graves' disease.

The central role of thyrotropin receptor antibodies (TRAbs) in the pathogenesis of Graves' disease has been recognised for several decades. However, the practical application of testing for TRAbs in clinical decision making remains the subject of controversy. The diagnosis of Graves' disease can be made in most cases simply based on a patient's clinical presentation. The TRAb test is therefore of most value in ambiguous clinical scenarios such as in the differential diagnosis of unilateral exophthalmos, euthyroid Graves' ophthalmopathy, subclinical hyperthyroidism, thyrotoxicosis associated with hyperemesis gravidarum, amiodarone-induced thyrotoxicosis and painless thyroiditis. It may also have a role in predicting the risk of a recurrence of Graves' disease following a course of antithyroid drug treatment. One further clinical utility of the TRAb test is in pregnancy where antibody titre measured during the third trimester is used to predict the risk of neonatal thyroid dysfunction. The TRAb titre not only aids in clinching a difficult diagnosis but can also help guide treatment in some patients. Although the TRAb assay has become more affordable in recent years, cost remains an important factor when considering its use routinely. Nonetheless, this is an underutilised blood test that could augment standard endocrine investigations in the differential diagnosis of hyperthyroidism.