Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37567945›Full record

Trial reportAesthetic plastic surgery2024

Tip Support in the Cleft Lip Rhinoplasty: A Comparison of Septal Extension Graft and Columellar Strut Graft.

Muhammed Furkan Acil, Arda Kucukguven, Mert Calis, Fatma Figen Ozgur

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Muhammed Furkan AcilDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey. acilfurkan@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-4445-2733
Arda KucukguvenDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.
Mert CalisDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.
Fatma Figen OzgurDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe aimed to comparatively analyze nasal projection and rotation changes in patients that underwent secondary cleft rhinoplasty with a columellar strut graft (CSG) or septal extension graft (SEG).

methodsThirty-three patients were randomly divided into two groups. Preoperative, intraoperative (immediate postoperative), postoperative 1-, 6- and 12-month profile view pictures were analyzed. The nasion (N), alar base-cheek junction (A), tip defining point (T), columella (C), and lips (L) were marked. The AT/AN ratio, NAT angle, Goode ratio, and columellar-labial angle (CLA) were measured.

resultsRegarding tip projection, the AT/AN ratio was lower in CSG group compared to SEG group postoperatively. In CSG group, there was a significant progressive decrease in the AT/AN ratio, whereas in SEG group, it decreased until postoperative 6 month. Regarding tip rotation, the NAT angle was higher in CSG group postoperatively and increased progressively. In SEG group, the NAT angle was lower intraoperatively compared to the postoperative period, whereas it did not differ significantly in-between follow-ups. The Goode ratio was significantly lower in CSG group compared to SEG group postoperatively. In SEG group, the Goode ratio was significantly higher intraoperatively compared to the postoperative period, but it did not differ significantly in-between follow-ups. In CSG group, the Goode ratio decreased progressively. The CLA decreased in both groups, but there was no statistically significant difference between the groups.

conclusionSecondary cleft lip rhinoplasty is a distinct subgroup of rhinoplasty that necessitates stable and strong tip support. SEG provides more reliable and predictable long-term results in secondary cleft lip rhinoplasty than CSG. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Indexed as

Cleft LipNasal SeptumRhinoplastyAdolescentAdultChildEstheticsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleRisk AssessmentTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultCleft lipColumellar strut graftNasal projectionNasal tip rotationRhinoplastySeptal extension graft

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.