Local versus general anesthesia for the management of nasal bone fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Comparison of outcomes for general and local anesthesia in the management of nasal bone fractures: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis aimed to perform a head-to-head comparison of the role of general anesthesia (GA) and local anesthesia (LA) in the management of patients with nasal bone fractures (NBFs).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were comprehensively searched. Studies investigating the clinical outcomes of GA and LA in the management of NBFs were included. Pooled odds ratios (OR) with the respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Heterogeneity between the included studies was evaluated. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed.

RESULTS

Eight studies were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled ORs for cosmetic results, residual septal deformity, the need for further surgery, patients' satisfaction with the anesthesia procedure, and patients' satisfaction with the surgery results were 0.70 (95% CI 0.18, 2.64; z = - 0.53, p = 0.5957), 1.11 (95% CI 0.37, 3.30; z = 0.18, p = 0.8558), 1.19 (95% CI 0.65, 2.20; z = 0.56, p = 0.5760), 1.57 (95% CI 0.92, 2.69; z = 1.65, p = 0.0982), and 1.00 (95% CI 0.55, 1.80; z = - 0.00, p = 0.9974).

CONCLUSIONS

Insignificant difference on clinical outcomes was observed between GA and LA in the manipulation of patients with NBFs, and the choice of anesthetic approach should be based on the tolerability of the methods and the severity of nasal fractures.

Nasal Fractures: Acute, Subacute, and Delayed Management

Nasal fractures are very common. The literature describes early intervention (<14 days) with closed techniques as cost-effective, minimizing the need for possible secondary surgeries and improved early patient satisfaction. However, the authors observe a measurably high rate of subsequent open treatment after closed treatment, particularly where there is significant septal involvement in the fracture. Moreover, delayed intervention (>3 months) with an open approach has many advantages over early closed technique, including lower revision rate, improved ability for rigid fixation and support, and the ability to correct severe dorsal or caudal L-strut deformities, nasal valve issues, and severe nasal bony deviation/deformities.

Closed reduction of nasoseptal fractures: key concepts for predictable results

Nasal complex injuries are the most common facial fracture encountered in the trauma population. Multiple surgical techniques for treatment of these fractures have been described with varying results. The goal of this study was to review the efficacy of closed reduction of nasal and septal fractures using a technique based upon several key concepts. We reviewed the records of patients who had undergone isolated nasal and/or septal fractures with closed reduction at our institution between January 2013 and November 2021. Inclusion criteria consisted of preoperative CT imaging, surgical treatment within fourteen days of initial injury, and follow up of at least one year. All patients were treated under general or deep sedation. The same surgical technique was applied with closed reduction of the septum and nasal bones with internal and external postoperative splints. Of the 232 records initially reviewed, 103 met inclusion criteria. Four patients had undergone revision septorhinoplasty (3.9%). Mean (range) follow up was 2.7 (1-8.2) years. Three patients had undergone revision nasal repair due to persistent airflow obstruction with complete resolution of symptoms after revision. The other patient received multiple revisions at another institution as a result of their dissatisfaction with cosmesis without improvement. Closed reduction of nasal and septal fractures can be a highly successful procedure and yield predictable results, limiting the need for post-traumatic open septorhinoplastic surgery. Five critical concepts of nasal fracture repair can help surgeons achieve predictable functional and cosmetic results: selection, timing, anaesthesia, reduction, and support.

Patient Discomfort After Rhinoplasty With and Without Osteotomy Under Conscious Sedation

OBJECTIVE

Many rhinoplasty techniques, including dorsum augmentation and tip surgery, could be performed under conscious sedation rather than general anesthesia. However, as osteotomy is an invasive procedure, it is burdensome for surgeons to perform osteotomy under conscious sedation. As patient ratings of pain and satisfaction when osteotomy is performed under conscious sedation are unknown, this study aimed to determine discomfort of osteotomy performed under conscious sedation.

METHODS

Patients who underwent rhinoplasty with conscious sedation were prospectively included in the study. The patients were classified into an osteotomy and a nonosteotomy group. Questionnaires with a visual analog scale ranging from 0 to 10 were utilized to assess patient pain and satisfaction. Patients were also asked whether they would choose conscious sedation for future rhinoplasty operations. To evaluate adverse events, cardiopulmonary vital signs and nausea or vomiting were assessed.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients with a mean age of 32.7 years were included in the study. The mean patients' visual analog scale scores for pain and satisfaction were 3.3±2.0 and 7.2±1.9, respectively. Most of the patients [42, (93%)] stated that they would choose conscious sedation again if they had further operations in the future. No significant adverse effects occurred, and there were no significant differences in patients' ratings of pain and satisfaction between osteotomy and nonosteotomy groups when conscious sedation was used.

CONCLUSION

Patients' ratings of pain and satisfaction, and a lack of significant adverse effects, indicated that rhinoplasty can be performed under conscious sedation, even with osteotomy.

Prolonged viral shedding identified from external splints and intranasal packings in immediately cured COVID-19 patients with nasal fractures: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to measure and compare prolonged viral shedding (PVS) identified from external splints (ES) and intranasal packings (IP) for isolated nasal fracture (INF) repair in immediately cured asymptomatic vs. mildly symptomatic COVID-19 patients (AS-COVID vs. MS-COVID).

METHODS

We designed a retrospective cohort study and enroled a sample of post-AS-COVID and post-MS-COVID patients, whose INF were treated at a German level 1 trauma centre. The primary predictor variable was COVID severity presurgery (AS-COVD vs. MS-COVID). The main outcome variable was PVS detected in ES/IP. Other study variables were separated into demographic, clinical, and operative. Descriptive, bi- and multivariate statistics were computed, and statistical significance was set at P≤ 0.05.

RESULTS

The study sample comprised 15 INF patients (53.3% females; 46.7% post-AS-COVID) with a mean age of 42.2 ± 22.7 years (range, 18-85). 13.3% ES and 53.3% IP were contaminated with SARS-CoV-2. However, only IP-contamination between the two cohorts reached statistical significance (P= 0.01; odds ratio, 0.02; 95% confidence interval, 0 to 0.47; Pearson's r= 0.73; post hoc power = 87.4%). Multiple linear regression models refuted the associations between PVS and the other parameters (i.e. age, gender, time to treatment, length of hospital stay, lengths of ES/IP placement).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a relative low sample size, our findings suggest PVS via endonasal materials removed from cured COVID-19 patients, especially those healed from MS-COVID. This PVS may trigger re-infection and surgical site infections and/or transmission to other humans, and thereby, requires further investigations.

Nasal and Naso-orbito-ethmoid Fractures

Craniofacial fractures are common among trauma patients. Nasal fractures are the most common craniofacial fracture. Understanding how to evaluate and manage craniofacial fractures is important for the craniofacial trauma consultant. This manuscript describes the appropriate workup and management of nasal and naso-orbito-ethmoid fractures.

Nasal Fractures

This article outlines current methods in the evaluation and management of nasal fractures including clinical workup, imaging, and treatment.

How COVID-19 Changed Our Management of Nasal Bone Fractures and Its Impact on Patient Outcomes-A Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVES

Nasal bone fractures are a common presentation to the Ear, Nose and Throat (ENT) surgeon. Simple, closed fractures are assessed and considered for closed manipulation under anesthesia (MUA #nasal bones). Most departments perform this under general anesthesia (GA). Our protocol changed in the face of COVID-19, where procedures were alternatively performed under local anesthesia (LA) in the clinic, to cope with lack of elective theater capacity during the pandemic, while still allowing a nasal fracture service to take place. We present postoperative patient outcomes on breathing and shape, comparing GA versus LA.

METHODS

Patient records retrospectively analyzed (January 2020-August 2020), and patients undergoing MUA #nasal bones interviewed by telephone after one month. Exclusion criteria were open injuries or depressed nasal bones requiring elevation. Breathing and shape scores were evaluated subjectively using a Likert scale (1 = very unsatisfied, 5 = very satisfied).

RESULTS

Two hundred five nasal injury referrals were made (21 MUA #nasal bones under GA and 27 under LA). Manipulation under anesthesia #nasal bones significantly improved both breathing satisfaction scores (GA; 2.88 ± 0.24 to 4.06 ± 0.23, P < 0.05; LA; 2.86 ± 0.22 to 3.77 ± 0.27, P < 0.05) and aesthetic scores (GA; 2.00 ± 0.21 to 3.94 ± 0.23, P < 0.05; LA; 1.64 ± 0.19 to 3.59 ± 0.28, P < 0.05) in both GA and LA groups. There was no statistically significant difference between LA and GA in postoperative outcomes. There was a trend toward greater satisfaction for GA, though this was not statistically significant and may be impacted by the rate of cartilaginous deformity in the LA group. Both techniques were well tolerated and most patients would repeat the procedure in hindsight.

CONCLUSIONS

Local anesthesia could provide a safer, cheaper, and satisfactory alternative for performing MUA #nasal bones in the clinic for selected patients, particularly with reduction of elective theater capacity in the event of further COVID-19 surges. We recommend training junior ENT surgeons to perform this procedure under supervision with adequate protective measures.

Comparison of Sedation with Dexmedetomidine Alfentanil Versus Ketamine-Alfentanil in Patients Undergoing Closed Reduction of Nasal Fractures

Objectives

To compare the sedative effects of dexmedetomidine alfentanil versus ketamine-alfentanil in patients undergoing closed reduction of nasal fractures on the basis of intraoperative hemodynamic changes, satisfaction of patients and surgeons, and the adverse effects.

Methods

Sixty patients with ASA class 1 or 2 were randomized to either of two groups, a dexmedetomidine alfentanil group (DA group; n = 30) or a ketamine-alfentanil group (KA group; n = 30). Hemodynamic parameters, oxygenation status, adverse events, the satisfaction of patients and surgeons, and postoperative pain scores by visual analog scale (VAS) were recorded at specific time intervals during the trial.

Results

Systolic blood pressure was significantly lower in the DA group than in the KA group from T1 min to T15 min. The duration of the recovery ward stay was longer in the DA group; however, two groups were similar in terms of total anesthesia time and awakening time. Likewise, two groups were similar in terms of the patient and surgeon’s satisfaction, pain scores, and the occurrence of adverse effects.

Conclusions

Both sedation methods were safely performed, and dexmedetomidine-alfentanil is as effective as ketamine-alfentanil in patients undergoing short-term operations such as nasal fracture corrections.

Pediatric-Specific Midfacial Fracture Patterns and Management: Pediatric Versus Adult Patients

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the midfacial fracture patterns and management approaches between pediatric and adult patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 164 pediatric patients (<16 years old) and 564 nongeriatric adult patients (16 to 65 years old) with midfacial fractures at a single institution between 2011 and 2016. The location of the fractures, along with the etiology and management of the midfacial fractures, were compared.

RESULTS

Significantly greater proportions of pediatric versus adult patients had sports-related injuries (P < 0.001) and sustained nasal fractures (P < 0.001). On the other hand, significantly greater proportions of adult versus pediatric patients were injured in falls, traffic accidents, or assaults (P = 0.004, P < 0.001, and P = 0.002) and sustained maxillary or zygomatic fractures (P = 0.039 and P < 0.001). Bivariate logistic regression analyses revealed that the risks of nasal, maxillary, and zygomatic fractures were significantly related to age status after adjusting for etiology (P < 0.001, P = 0.045, and P < 0.001). In contrast, the risks of hospitalization and surgical treatment were significantly associated with etiology, but not with age status (P = 0.290 and P = 0.847).

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that the age-related structure and composition of the facial skeleton affect the pediatric-specific fracture patterns independent of the etiology. The comparisons in this study may serve as a guide for the management of pediatric midfacial fractures.

Comparison of emergence agitation between succinylcholine and rocuronium-sugammadex in adults following closed reduction of a nasal bone fracture: a prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Sugammadex allows rapid recovery from rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade. Succinylcholine is often used for brief surgeries but is associated with myalgia, headache, histamine release, and increased lactate levels. Thus, we hypothesized that succinylcholine may affect emergence agitation (EA) and compared the effects of succinylcholine and rocuronium-sugammadex on EA in patients undergoing closed reduction of a nasal bone fracture under general anesthesia.

METHODS

Forty-two patients were prospectively enrolled and allocated randomly to the succinylcholine group (group SC) or the rocuronium-sugammadex group (group RS; each n = 21). Neuromuscular block and its reversal were achieved with succinylcholine and normal saline in group SC, whereas rocuronium and sugammadex were administered in group RS. After surgery, the incidence of EA as a primary outcome, the incidence of dangerous EA, and duration of EA as secondary outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

The incidence of EA was higher in group SC than in group RS (90.5% vs. 47.6%, respectively; relative risk [RR] 4.3; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2 to 15.7; P = .006). The incidence of dangerous EA increased in group SC compared to group RS (33.3% vs. 4.8%, respectively; RR 2.1; 95% CI 1.3 to 3.4; P = .045). The duration of agitation was longer in group SC than in group RS [106.5 (65.1) vs. 40.4 (26.0) sec; mean difference 66.1 s; 95% CI 31.0 to 101.1; effect size 1.3; P = .001).

CONCLUSION

Succinylcholine increases the incidence, severity, and duration of EA compared to rocuronium-sugammadex in patients undergoing closed reduction of a nasal bone fracture.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CRiS Registration number KCT0002673. Initial registration date was 31 January 2018 (Retrospectively registered).

IMPACT OF LOCAL INFILTRATION ANESTHESIA ON POSTOPERATIVE PAIN MANAGEMENT AFTER RHINOPLASTY IN DAY CARE SURGERY

Use of local infiltration anaesthesia with 2% lidocaine in combination with epinephrine 1/100000 in rhinoplasty and 0.25% levobupivacaine in this research as an adjunct to general anaesthesia is compared analysing the need for postoperative analgesia in rhinoplasty patients. 30 patients received lidocaine combined with epinephrine (LA) and other 30 patients received levobupivacaine (LB). Comparison is done with Visual Analogue Scale in 30 min and 1, 3, 6 h postoperatively. Also 24 h need for analgesic treatment was recorded. In conclusion postoperative analgesia in LB group with general anaesthesia was significantly prolonged (P = 0.038).

Endonasal Infiltrative Anesthesia for Nasal Fracture Reduction

This study investigated the use of endonasal infiltrative anesthesia for the management of pain associated with nasal bone fracture reduction. Fifty-two patients with nasal bone fractures were distributed in 2 groups. In the first group, topical endonasal anesthesia and external transcutaneous infiltrative anesthesia were employed. In the second group, endonasal infiltrative anesthesia was also added. Visual analog scale pain scores related to the different steps of the procedure were registered. The addition of endonasal infiltrative anesthesia was associated with a significant decrease (p < .05) in pain during reduction maneuvers (6.71 vs. 4.83) and nasal packing (5.18 vs. 3.46). Addition of endonasal infiltrative anesthesia is an effective method of pain reduction during nasal bone fracture treatment.

Randomised, masked study of local anaesthesia administered prior to external dacryocystorhinostomy under general anaesthesia

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether administration of local anaesthetic at the site of skin incision during open lacrimal drainage surgery under general anaesthesia alters the total dosage of anaesthetic drugs required during total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA), and whether it alters postoperative pain and recovery.

STUDY DESIGN

Masked comparison of a randomized, two-group interventional study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients undergoing unilateral external dacryocystorhinostomy under total intravenous general anaesthesia were recruited from the lacrimal service at Moorfields Eye Hospital between September 2012 and February 2014. The patients were randomised to receive, after induction and stabilisation of general anaesthesia, infiltration of the ipsilateral paranasal tissues with 2.5 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine with 1:100000 epinephrine ("treatment" group), or a sham injection ("control" group); the infiltration was performed about 7 min prior to the skin incision. The infusion rates for propofol and remifentanil were adjusted to maintain a steady intra-operative mean blood pressure of 55-70 mmHg and BIS score of 40-60%. The time taken for extubation of the patient after cessation of TIVA was recorded, and postoperative pain scores (on a Likert scale from 0-10) were taken at regular intervals after extubation. The average intra-operative mean blood pressures, total drug usage, extubation time and pain scores for each of the two groups were compared using two-tail Student's t-testing and Wilcoxon rank sum testing.

RESULTS

There were 12 patients (7 female; 58%) in the treatment group and 11 (7 female; 64%) in the control group, with similar average age at surgery (59 years treatment, 53 years control; p = 0.38) The average operative time was 45 min in the treatment group (median 42, range 30-55) and 47 min (median 45; range 37-61) in the control group (p = 0.52). The mean dosage of propofol required to maintain satisfactory GA was significantly less in the "treatment" group (89.8 mcg/kg/min) as compared to the "control" group (mean 126 mcg/kg/min) (p = 0.0007). Likewise, remifentanil dosage was significantly less in the "treatment" group (100 ng/kg/min) as compared to controls (259 ng/kg/min) (p = 0.00007). The mean non-invasive blood pressure was consistently lower during surgery in the "treated" group, and showed less intra-operative variation. After surgery, the patients receiving LA had a significantly shorter extubation time (mean time 6.0 min in "treated" group, 12.1 min in "controls"; P < 0.0002) and also significantly lower pain scores at 10, 30, 60, 120 and 180 min after extubation (p < 0.01, p < 0.01, p < 0.01, p < 0.01 and p < 0.05, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Ipsilateral infiltration of local anaesthesia containing epinephrine in the paranasal tissues just prior to open dacryocystorhinostomy under total intravenous anaesthesia is associated with a 28% reduction in mean propofol usage, and a 61% reduction in remifentanil usage. LA usage during GA also produces improved and less variable intra-operative mean blood pressures, a significantly shorter extubation time and significantly lower postoperative pain scores.

Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes Between Monitored Anesthesia Care and General Anesthesia in Closed Reduction of Nasal Fracture

Fracture of nasal bone is among the most common facial bone fractures. Reduction of nasal bone fracture is able to be performed under local or general anesthesia. The aim of this study is to compare monitored anesthetic care (MAC) and general anesthesia (GA) based on intraoperative vital signs, and the adverse effects after closed reduction of nasal bone fractures.The authors performed a retrospective study of 45 patients who underwent a closed reduction of nasal bone fracture between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2016. Patients are divided into an MAC group (n = 17) or GA group (n = 28). A sore throat, postoperative pain scores, nausea, vomiting, hospital stay, operation time, and the result of surgery are compared between the groups. All the patients have interviewed their satisfaction of aesthetic and functional outcome.The operation time and hospital stay were lower in the MAC group. There is no difference in a sore throat, postoperative pain score, and the result of surgery significantly. In the MAC and GA groups, there was no statistically significant difference in the postoperative cosmetic and functional satisfaction scores.Closed reduction of nasal bone fracture using MAC is as safe and efficient as GA. However, MAC anesthesia may not be feasible if airway discomfort due to bleeding is expected, or fracture is severe and multiple manipulations are required. Therefore, MAC is considered to be a good alternative when patients undergoing short-term or small operations do not prefer general anesthesia.

Comparison of Efficacy Outcomes of Lidocaine Spray, Topical Lidocaine Injection, and Lidocaine General Anesthesia in Nasal Bone Fractures Surgeries: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

Background

Lidocaine is widely used as a general and local anesthetic in minor or major surgeries. The objective of the study was to compare postoperative pain relief and adverse events using different forms of lidocaine administration in patients following closed nasal bone reduction surgery.

Material/Methods

A total of 381 patients with a solitary nasal fracture that could be managed with closed reduction were included in this study and divided into 3 groups of 127 patients in each group. Patients had received 1% lidocaine HCl with epinephrine (LL group), inserted a mesh impregnated with lidocaine spray (TL group), or 1 mg/kg/h lidocaine infusion (GL group) before surgeries. Patients also received morphine when the pain was not controlled. The postoperative pain was assessed at 6 hours and 48 hours after surgery. Postoperative vomiting and nausea were evaluated. Repeated ANOVA/Tukey-Kramer multiple comparisons test was performed at 95% confidence level.

Results

At 6 hours after surgery, patients in the general lidocaine (GL) group reported decreased postoperative pain compared with those in the topical lidocaine (TL) group (P<0.001, q=6.633) and LL group (P<0.001, q=8.056). The morphine consumption within 48 hours was least in GL group than TL group (P<0.001, q=172.9) and LL group (P<0.001, q=226.42). Lidocaine infusion caused nausea (P<0.001, q=6.742) and vomiting (P<0.001, q=4.306).

Conclusions

Topical lidocaine anesthesia had the same postoperative pain relief and the least adverse events as local and general lidocaine anesthesia.

Anesthetic considerations during surgical intervention in Woake's syndrome -a case report

Background

Woake’s syndrome (WS) is a recurrent nasal polyposis, accompanied by broadening of the nose, frontal sinus aplasia, dyscrinia, and bronchiectasis. There has been no previous report on anesthetic management in patients with WS.

Case

We describe a case involving a 13-year-old male patient with WS who was scheduled for septorhinoplasty for necrotic ethmoiditis. Anesthesia was induced and maintained with propofol and remifentanil using a target-controlled infusion device. The anesthetic considerations of this rare syndrome and the advantages of an intravenous infusion method over local and volatile anesthesia for these patients are discussed. We report on caveats, such as pulmonary dysfunction during the anesthetic management, and nasal structural problems encountered in WS patients.

Conclusions

Given that conventional inhaled anesthesia reduces ciliary movement and that local anesthesia with sedative has several disadvantages, perioperative control and precautions against respiratory infections by using antibiotics, and preventing cilio-depressant actions, are important for anesthetic management.

Correction of Nasal Fractures

Nasal fractures are the most frequently fractured facial bone from blunt facial trauma resulting in a significant number of patients seeking treatment. Proper evaluation and treatment in the acute setting can minimize secondary surgeries, lower overall health care costs, and increase patient satisfaction. Nasal fracture management, however, varies widely between surgeons. The open treatment of isolated nasal fractures is a particularly controversial subject. This review seeks to describe the existing literature in isolated nasal fracture management.

Evidence-Based Medicine in Facial Trauma

This article provides the reader with a comprehensive review of high-level evidence-based medicine in facial trauma and highlights areas devoid of high-level evidence. The article is organized in the order one might approach a clinical problem: starting with the workup, followed by treatment considerations, operative decisions, and postoperative treatments. Individual injuries are discussed within each section, with an overview of the available high-level clinical evidence. This article not only provides a quick reference for the facial traumatologist, but also allows the reader to identify areas that lack high-level evidence, perhaps motivating future endeavors.

Midface Fractures I

Facial fractures are a common source of emergency department consultations for the plastic surgeon. A working understanding of evaluation, assessment, management, and prevention of further injury when dealing with these fractures is vital. This two-part series detailing the management of midface fractures serves as a guide for the appropriate workup and management of the wide variety of fracture patterns that are commonly encountered.

Osteotomies Demystified

Osteotomies are critical techniques in rhinoplasty. There are a variety of approaches, trajectories, and tools used with no widely standardized classification or nomenclature. Percutaneous osteotomies are gaining in popularity, and picture framing the nasomaxillary bone is crucial for predictable fracture and reproducible results. This is best accomplished with medial, lateral, and transverse osteotomies. Intermediate osteotomies are used less frequently, but provide more mobility. With a detailed understanding of anatomy and a thorough approach to nasal osteotomies, the contour and function of the bony vault can be reshaped with a successful outcome for both the surgeon and patient.

Evidence-Based Facial Fracture Management

With demands for an evidence-based approach to patient care, the management of facial fractures will come under increasing scrutiny because there is an overall deficiency in higher level clinical evidence. This article reviews the management of facial fractures, focusing on an evidence-based approach. It focuses on select areas of facial trauma in which there is controversy and presents randomized studies and meta-analysis to help define best practice. The article notes the many areas where the evidenced-based literature is weak and looks at the future of evidence-based facial trauma care.