DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Finger reduction of nasal bone fracture under local anesthesia: outcomes and patient reported satisfaction

  • Lee, Young-Jae (Department of Plastic Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Kyeong-Tae (Department of Plastic Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Pyon, Jai-Kyong (Department of Plastic Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine)
  • Received : 2018.10.02
  • Accepted : 2018.12.02
  • Published : 2019.02.20

Abstract

Background: Closed reduction of the fracture under general or local anesthesia with elevators or forceps is widely used to treat nasal bone fractures. However, operating under general anesthesia increases the risk of morbidity and raises the cost of management. Furthermore, using forceps or elevators may cause undercorrection, new fractures, mucosal damage, and nasal hemorrhage. We therefore performed manual reduction under local anesthesia, using the little finger, to minimize the demerits of treatment under general anesthesia with forceps or elevators and aimed to assess functional and aesthetic outcomes, and patient satisfaction. Methods: Patients who visited the plastic and reconstructive surgery department between November 2016 and November 2017 with nasal bone fractures and treated by a single surgeon were prospectively followed up. Patients with simple unilateral or bilateral nasal bone fractures were treated with bedside finger reduction under local anesthesia and patients with comminuted nasal bone or septal fractures were scheduled for closed reduction under general anesthesia. Results: Of 84 patients, 28 met the inclusion criterion and underwent bedside finger reduction under local anesthesia. Twenty-seven patients (96.4%) were successfully contacted via telephone for survey. Twenty-three (85.2%) showed good and three (11.1%) showed fair results. All 27 patients (100%) were satisfied with their postoperative function and 25 (92.6%) were satisfied with their postoperative aesthetic result. Twenty-five patients (92.6%) preferred the finger reduction method under local anesthesia over closed reduction under general anesthesia. Conclusion: Finger reduction under local anesthesia in patients with mild unilateral or bilateral nasal bone fractures is an easy and efficient procedure with high patient satisfaction and favorable postoperative functional and aesthetic outcomes.

Keywords

References

  1. Rubinstein B, Strong EB. Management of nasal fractures. Arch Fam Med 2000;9:738-42. https://doi.org/10.1001/archfami.9.8.738
  2. Love RL. Nasal fractures: patient satisfaction following closed reduction. N Z Med J 2010;123:45-8.
  3. Ichida M, Komuro Y, Koizumi T, Shimizu A, Yanai A. A repositioning technique for nasal fracture using the little finger. J Craniofac Surg 2008;19:1512-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e31818b37e0
  4. Bowerman E. Fractures of the middle third of the facial skeleton. In: Rowe NL, Williams JL, editors. Maxillofacial injuries. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1985. p. 363-433.
  5. Aloin HA. A propose du traitement des fractures du nez. note de tequnique chirurgicale. J Fr Otorhinolaryngol 1952;1:302.
  6. Humber PR, Horton CE. Trauma to the nose. In: Stark RB, editor. Plastic surgery of the head and neck. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1987. p. 390-401.
  7. Tremolet de Villers Y. Nasal fractures. J Trauma 1975;15:319-27. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005373-197504000-00008
  8. Tajima S. Treatment of facial bone fractures. 2nd ed. Tokyo: Kokuseido Publishing; 1999. p. 143-74.
  9. Paul N. Manson: facial fractures. In: Sherrell JA, Robert W, Beasley C, editors. Plastic Surgery. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1997. p. 383-411.
  10. Kurihara K, Kim K, Miyata K. Clinical study of new nasal bone fractures. Jpn J Plast Surg 1990;33:113-20.
  11. Rajapakse Y, Courtney M, Bialostocki A, Duncan G, Morrissey G. Nasal fractures: a study comparing local and general anaesthesia techniques. ANZ J Surg 2003;73:396-9. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1445-2197.2003.t01-1-02615.x
  12. Kim HS, Suh HW, Ha KY, Kim BY, Kim TY. The usefulness of the endonasal incisional approach for the treatment of nasal bone fracture. Arch Plast Surg 2012;39:209-15. https://doi.org/10.5999/aps.2012.39.3.209
  13. Goode RL, Spooner TR. Management of nasal fractures in children: a review of current practices. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 1972;11:526-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/000992287201100915
  14. Fomon S, Schattner A, Bell JW, Kleinfeld L, Lewy R. Management of recent nasal fractures. AMA Arch Otolaryngol 1952; 55:321-42. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.1952.00710010331004
  15. Gillies H, Kilner T. Modern technique in treatment. Lancet 1929;1:147-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(00)82459-9
  16. Safian J, Tamerin J. Recent fractures of the nose. Am J Surg 1936;31:10-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9610(36)90435-X

Cited by

  1. The clinical usefulness of closed reduction of nasal bone using only a periosteal elevator with a rubber band vol.20, pp.5, 2019, https://doi.org/10.7181/acfs.2019.00388
  2. Antibiotic use in nasal bone fracture: a nationwide population-based cohort study in Korea vol.22, pp.5, 2021, https://doi.org/10.7181/acfs.2021.00367