Comparison of the Effects of Skin Microneedling with Cupping Therapy and Microneedling Alone: An Experimental Study.

BACKGROUND: Microneedling promotes percutaneous collagen induction; cupping therapy creates negative pressure and leads to increased blood flow in the applied area. The addition of cupping therapy to microneedling is thought to contribute positively to microneedling's effects. This study was carried out to investigate the histologic effects of adding cupping therapy to microneedling. METHODS: Thirty Wistar rats were divided into five groups, with six rats in each group. One control group and four experimental groups were formed, which are defined as follows: the control group; the single-session microneedling applied to the dorsal trunk group; the 15-minute cupping therapy added to the single-session microneedling group; the microneedling applied over a total of three sessions at 3-week intervals group; and the microneedling with cupping therapy applied over a total of three sessions at 3-week intervals group. Each animal was euthanized at the end of the fourth week following the last treatment, and skin samples were evaluated histologically with hematoxylin and eosin stain and type I and III collagen antibody immunostaining. RESULTS: The addition of cupping therapy to microneedling increased the thickness of the epidermis and dermis. A significant increase in type I collagen immunostaining and the type-I-to-type III collagen ratio was seen only in the single-session microneedling applied to the dorsal trunk group. Cupping therapy did not generate a significant difference in type I collagen immunostaining. No treatment was found to produce a significant increase in type III collagen immunostaining. CONCLUSION: Cupping therapy can be added to microneedling therapy and used to increase certain desired effects on skin. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Microneedling is an easy and effective method to improve skin quality in clinical practice.

Flexible Tongue-in-Groove Technique and Its Effectiveness Compared to Classic Tongue-in-Groove and Columellar Strut Graft Techniques: A Retrospective Analysis of 237 Open Rhinoplasty Cases.

BACKGROUND: The medial crura are almost always supported in tip surgery using columellar strut graft placement or tongue-in-groove suturing to the caudal septum. In this study, the authors present a modified tongue-in-groove (called "flexible tongue-in-groove") technique. METHODS: A total of 237 patients who underwent open rhinoplasty between January of 2016 and June of 2018 were included in this retrospective study. The patients were divided into three main groups: (1) flexible tongue-in-groove, (2) classic tongue-in-groove, and (3) columellar strut. Using standardized preoperative and postoperative (1-, 6-, and 12-month) lateral view photographs, the nasolabial angle and Goode ratio were measured for nasal tip rotation and projection, respectively. RESULTS: Flexible tongue-in-groove (n = 53) and classic tongue-in-groove (n = 107) techniques showed a significantly smaller decrease in the nasolabial angle from month 1 to month 12 than did the columellar strut technique (n = 77) (p < 0.05). These statistically significant differences were not found when the time intervals were narrowed (p > 0.05). Flexible and classic tongue-in-groove techniques showed significantly higher Goode ratios than did the columellar strut technique at 1, 6, and 12 months (p < 0.05 for all). In various analyses using the nasolabial angle and Goode ratio, no statistically significant difference was found between flexible and classic tongue-in-groove techniques (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Flexible and classic tongue-in-groove techniques provide more durable results in nasolabial angle and Goode ratio measurements than does the columellar strut technique in primary open-approach rhinoplasty. The flexible tongue-in-groove technique is as robust as the classic tongue-in-groove technique in appropriate cases. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Revision Rhinoplasty after Open Rhinoplasty: Lessons from 252 Cases and Analysis of Risk Factors.

BACKGROUND: In this study, patients who required aesthetic revision surgery after open rhinoplasty were retrospectively screened for risk factors. METHODS: Two hundred fifty-two patients who underwent revision were included in the study. Nasal deformities before the revision were determined for each patient and evaluated in terms of their statistical relationship with preoperative nasal morphology and surgical techniques used. RESULTS: The revision rate was found to be 10.8 percent. The three most common aesthetic reasons for revision were insufficient nasal tip rotation (37.7 percent), hanging columella (30.2 percent), and supratip deformity (28.6 percent). According to logistic regression analysis, the use of a strut increased the risk of inadequate nasal tip rotation by 5.3-fold compared to the tongue-in-groove technique, whereas inadequate nasal tip projection before surgery increased this risk by 2-fold. Being older than 40 years increased the risk of hanging columella by 6.8-fold, whereas the use of strut grafting instead of the tongue-in-groove technique increased this risk by 5.9-fold. The use of strut grafts instead of the tongue-in-groove technique increased the risk of supratip deformity by 2.2-fold. CONCLUSIONS: To ensure adequate nasal tip rotation after surgery in patients with advanced age and low nasal tip projection and rotation, it will be more appropriate to either use the tongue-in-groove technique or rotate the nasal tip more than normal. In patients with advanced age (>40 years) and low nasolabial angle before surgery, the use of tongue-in-groove technique instead of strut grafting may be advantageous for reducing the incidence of supratip and hanging columella. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, III.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor Reduces Radiation-Induced Periprosthetic Capsular Fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: The capsular contracture is one of the main complications after radiotherapy in patients with implant-based reconstruction. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of ramipril for the prevention of radiation-induced fibrosis around the silicone implant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty Wistar rats in 5 groups were used. Group 1: implant; group 2: implant + radiation; group 3: ramipril + implant; group 4: ramipril + implant + radiation; group 5: sham. Ramipril treatment was started 5 d before surgery and continued for 12 wk after surgery. A mini silicone implant was placed in the back of the rats. A single fraction of 21.5 Gy radiation was applied. Tissues were examined histologically and immunohistochemically (TGF-ß1, MMP-2, and TIMP-2 expression). The alteration of plasma TGF-ß1 levels was examined before and after the experiment. RESULTS: After applying implant or implant + radiation, capsular thickness, percentage of fibrotic area, tissue and plasma TGF-ß1 levels significantly increased, and MMP-2/TIMP-2 ratio significantly decreased compared with the sham group. In ramipril-treated groups, the decrease in capsular thickness, fibrosis, TGF-ß1 positivity, and an increase in MMP-2/TIMP-2 ratio were found significant. In the ramipril + implant + radiation group, the alteration values of TGF-ß1 dramatically decreased. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that ramipril reduces radiation-induced fibrosis and contracture. The results of our study may be important for the design of the clinical trials required to investigate the effective and safe doses of ramipril, which is an inexpensive and easily tolerated drug, on humans.