ArticleCureus2024
Autospreader Flaps in Closed Rhinoplasty: Our Technique and Long-Term Results.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRhinoplasty is a common and complex surgical procedure. Respiratory and aesthetic dissatisfaction are major causes of revision surgeries. Multiple techniques were described to reconstruct the middle nasal vault and improve functional outcomes. One of these techniques is the use of autospreader flaps. These flaps were constantly modified by different surgeons. In our practice, we use a modified technique of autospreader flaps in closed rhinoplasty. Neither upper lateral cartilage scoring nor suture fixation to the septum was done.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective study on 183 patients, analyzing revision rates and long-term functional results using the NOSE scale. Data analysis was done using IBM Corp. Released 2019. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
resultsLong-term results showed satisfactory aesthetic outcomes with low revision rates (13.6%). Concerning the NOSE score, it was completed by 87 of the 183 patients, yielding a response rate of 47.5%. A mean NOSE score of 18.1 +/- 21.1 at 4.4 years of follow-up was obtained.
conclusionAutospreader flaps offer simplicity, reproducibility, and effectiveness in closed rhinoplasty. It represents a valuable option for selected patients, especially in populations with high dorsal reduction surgery demand.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.