Management of Acute Nasal Bone Fractures in Adults: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis | ||||
| The Egyptian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery | ||||
| Article 8, Volume 48, Issue 4, October 2024, Page 297-308 PDF (1.31 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/ejprs.2024.385105 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Khaled Reyad  ; Amir Samir Elbarbary  ; Mohamed Naguib Afifi* ; Mohamed Saad ElDin
| ||||
| The Department of Plastic, Burn and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Background: The optimal timing, patient selection, and surgical technique for the management of nasal trauma are not yet clearly established. The choice of surgical technique also varies depending on the severity of the injury, the patient’s individual anatomy, surgeon selection and expertise. Objective: To review previous studies discussing the treatment of acute nasal fractures in adults. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in March 2022 for papers published between 2002 and 2022. To compare the outcomes of closed nasal bone reduction, septal reduction to other treatments as open reduction, limited septoplasty, septorhinoplasty, and delayed rhinoplasty for nasal bone fractures. Also, to assess how reduction type, type of anesthesia, presence of septal fractures and the time interval between injury and treatment could affect patient satisfaction post operatively, rate of complications, revisional surgeries and olfactory dysfunction. Results: A meta-analysis of 19 studies found that reduction type and timing interval between injury and treatment had a significant impact on patient satisfaction. Reduction type and the type anesthesia also had a significant impact on post-operative complication rates. Conclusion: Open nasal reduction (ONR) is associated with higher patient satisfaction, however, closed nasal reduction may be safer. Patients with septal fractures are less satisfied with their results. General anesthesia has higher satisfaction rates and lower complication rates than local anesthesia. Early surgical intervention within 2 weeks of trauma is recommended. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Nasal bone reduction; Reduction types; Satisfaction; Septal fracture | ||||
| References | ||||
|
Hwang K., Ki S.J. and Ko S.H.: Etiology of nasal bone fractures. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, May 1; 28 (3): 785-8, 2017. 2- Han D.S., Han Y.S. and Park J.H.: A new approach to the treatment of nasal bone fracture: Radiologic classification of nasal bone fractures and its clinical application. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg., 69 (11): 2841-2847, 2011. 3- Kim J.H., Lee J.W. and Park C.H.: Cosmetic rhinoseptoplasty in acute nasal bone fracture. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg., 149 (2): 212-218, 2013. 4- Mondin V., Rinaldo A. and Ferlito A.: Management of nasal bone fractures. American Journal of Otolaryngology, May 1; 26 (3): 181-5, 2005. 5- Choi M.H., Cheon J.S., Son K.M., et al.: Long-term postoperative satisfaction, and complications in nasal bone fracture patients according to fracture type, site, and severity. Arch Craniofacial Surg., 21 (1): 7–14, 2020. 6- Kim J.H., Lee J.W. and Park C.H.: Cosmetic rhinoseptoplasty in acute nasal bone fracture. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg., 149 (2): 212-218, 2013. 7- Kim S.W., Park B., Lee T.G., et al.: Olfactory Dysfunction in Nasal Bone Fracture. Arch Craniofacial Surg., 18 (2): 92–6, 2017. 8- Wang W., Lee T., Kohlert S., et al.: Nasal fractures: The role of primary reduction and secondary revision. Facial Plastic Surgery, Dec. 35 (06): 590-601, 2019. 9- Page M.J., McKenzie J.E., Bossuyt P.M., et al.: The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, Mar. 29; 372: n71, 2021. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71. PMID: 33782057; PMCID: PMC8005924. 10- Reilly M.J. and Davison S.P.: Open vs closed approach to the nasal pyramid for fracture reduction. Arch Facial Plast Surg., 9 (2): 82–6, 2007. 11- Staffel J.G.: Candidates’ thesis: Optimizing treatment of nasal fractures. Laryngoscope, 112 (10): 1709–19, 2002. 12- Sharma S.D., Kwame I. and Almeyda J.: Patient Aesthetic Satisfaction with Timing of Nasal Fracture Manipulation. Surg Res Pract., 2014 (1): 1–4, 2014. 13- Kim J.H., Lee J.H., Hong S.M., et al.: Open reduction of nasal bone fractures through an intercartilaginous incision. Acta Otolaryngol., 133 (1): 77–81, 2012. 14- Fattahi T., Steinberg B., Fernandes R., et al.: Repair of Nasal Complex Fracturesand the Need for Secondary Septo- Rhinoplasty. J. Oral Maxillofac Surg., 64 (12): 1785–9, 2006. 15- Younes A. and Elzayat S.: The role of septoplasty in the management of nasal septum fracture: A randomized quality of life study. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac Surg., 45 (11): 1430–4, 2016. 16- Lim H., Kang K.R., Koh S.H., et al.: Postoperative Changes after Closed Reduction of Nasal Fracture. J. Craniofac Surg., 28 (7): 1649–53, 2017. 17- Genther D. and Papel I.: Posttraumatic nasal deformities. Dorafshar A., Rodriguez E., Manson P., eds. In: Facial Trauma Surgery: From Primary Repair to Reconstruction. Edinburgh: Elsevier Health Sciences, 395–416, 2019. 18- Haack J. and Papel I.D.: Caudal septal deviation. Otolaryngol. Clin. North Am., 42 (3): 427-436, 2009. 19- Khwaja S., Pahade A.V., Luff D., et al.: Nasal fracture reduction: Local versus general anaesthesia. Rhinology, Mar. 1; 45 (1): 83-8, 2007. 20- Ridder G.J., Boedeker C.C., Fradis M., et al.: Technique and timing for closed reduction of isolated nasal fractures: A retrospective study. Ear, Nose & Throat Journal, Jan. 81 (1): 49-54, 2002. | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 240 PDF Download: 364 |
||||
