Costal Cartilage Lateral Crural Strut Graft for Correction of External Nasal Valve Dysfunction in Primary and Revision Rhinoplasty.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the costal cartilage lateral crural strut graft's (LCSG) ability to support a weak lateral crus in patients with external nasal valve dysfunction (EVD) undergoing primary versus revision functional rhinoplasty. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study of 26 patients (mean [SD]: 40.23 [6.75] years of age; 10 [38%] females) with clinically diagnosed EVD, who underwent primary versus revision functional rhinoplasty with the use of a costal cartilage LCSG (10 [38%] primary functional rhinoplasty patients and the 16 [62%] revision patients). Preoperative and 12-month postoperative subjective and objective functional measurements along with statistical analysis were performed. RESULTS: While all baseline demographic and preoperative functional measurement scores were similar between the 2 groups, the primary cohort's preoperative scores were higher overall. Follow-up was a mean of 14.58 months. The primary group demonstrated a greater difference in score improvement postoperatively in all categories. All patients had significantly improved visual analog scale (VAS), Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation Scale, 22-Item Sinonasal Outcome Test, and nasal peak inspiratory flow (NPIF) scores. When comparing the overall score outcome and surgical efficacy of the LCSG, both groups had near equal final score outcomes with the exception of VASL and NPIF. CONCLUSION: The LCSG is a viable and versatile option in the management of EVD for both primary and revision rhinoplasty patients.

Variability of the Anterior Ethmoid Artery in Endoscopic Sinus Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: The anterior ethmoidal artery (AEA) demonstrates anatomic variability relative to its descent from the anterior skull base. Our study's objective was to assess for correlation of AEA descent and laterality, in addition to correlation of AEA descent and the presence of supraorbital ethmoid cells (SOEC) and concha bullosae (CB). METHOD: A retrospective study was performed at a tertiary rhinology center from January 2019 to January 2020. Noncontrast maxillofacial computed tomography scans were examined independently by 2 fellowship trained rhinologists. The vertical distance from both left and right AEAs to the ipsilateral skull base were compared and correlated with the presence of ipsilateral SOEC and CB. RESULTS: Computed tomography scans from 50 subjects were included. Mean age was 50.68 years (40% females). The distance of AEA to the skull base was greater on the left when compared to the right (62% vs 48%) (P < .05). The left AEA had an average descent of 2.84 mm versus 1.78 mm on the right (P < .05). An SOEC was present in 56% of cases. Thirty-eight percent of subjects had both SOEC and AEA descent on the right, while 52% of subjects had both on the left. This reached a statistical significance on both sides (P < .05). Concha bullosa was present in 35% of cases, with both AEA descent and CB present in 16% on the right, and 32% on the left. CONCLUSION: The AEA displays variability in vertical descent from the skull base, with greater variability on the left. These findings implore vigilance with evaluation of preoperative imaging and during sinus surgery, especially in the presence of SOEC and CB.

Impact of Draf III, Draf IIb, and Draf IIa frontal sinus surgery on nasal irrigation distribution.

BACKGROUND: Delivery of topical pharmacotherapy to the paranasal sinuses remains integral to the management of chronic rhinosinusitis. The frontal sinus remains a difficult access site for irrigations, often limited by its position relative to the nostril and ethmoid sinus. In view of the previous demonstration of improved frontal sinus irrigation with Draf III vs Draf IIa, in this work we sought to evaluate topical access of Draf IIb relative to Draf IIa and Draf III modification of the frontal sinus outflow tract. METHODS: Unfixed human cadaver heads were dissected using Draf IIa, Draf IIb, and Draf III frontal sinusotomies. Draf IIa, Draf IIb, and Draf III frontal sinusotomies were performed in progressive sequence on each cadaver head. Nasal irrigation fluid access to the frontal sinus was tested after each successive frontal sinus intervention. Irrigations were performed using Frankfort horizontal and vertex positioning. Blinded reviewers were then asked to evaluate nasal irrigation access based on an ordinal scale. RESULTS: Eight cadaveric specimens (age, 78 ± 12.3 years; 62.5% female) were assessed. The greatest distribution scores were recorded by Draf III, then IIb, and then IIa (90.7% vs 81.3% vs 50.1%; p < 0.001). Similarly, the rate of lavage was greatest with Draf III (50% vs 12.5% vs 12.5%). Vertex positioning and increasing volume trended toward improved distribution but did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Adequate delivery of topical therapy to the paranasal sinuses by nasal irrigation remains critical in the postoperative state. Although increasing the dimensions of the frontal recess improves nasal irrigation delivery, the Draf III procedure provides the optimal delivery of pharmacotherapy in those with frontal sinus disease.