Cargando…

Temporalis pull-through vs fascia lata augmentation in facial reanimation for facial paralysis

OBJECTIVES: Surgical rehabilitation of facial palsy is challenging as each case is unique and success rate is often unpredictable. In one technique, temporalis is elevated from origin preserving vessels, and this elevation increases the length which is tunneled into buccal tissues (pull-through tech...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Balaji, S. M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5343639/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28299269
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2231-0746.200323
_version_ 1782513405013262336
author Balaji, S. M.
author_facet Balaji, S. M.
author_sort Balaji, S. M.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Surgical rehabilitation of facial palsy is challenging as each case is unique and success rate is often unpredictable. In one technique, temporalis is elevated from origin preserving vessels, and this elevation increases the length which is tunneled into buccal tissues (pull-through technique, Group A). In the other technique, a harvested fascia lata is attached to temporalis after a coronoidectomy release and the fascia lata is attached to the modiolus (Group B). The aim of this study is to compare the two different surgical techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Case records of 22 cases, 15 females, and 7 males who were operated between 2008 and 2012 for facial palsy with at least 1-year follow-up, using either of the techniques were assessed for pull of muscle, postoperative pain, recovery time, motor control, and symmetry at rest. Descriptive statistics are presented. RESULTS: The Group A (n = 7) and Group B (n = 15) formed the study group. In the Group A, residual asymmetry (n = 3), poor postoperative muscle pull (n = 2) were noticed while in the modified group it was 2 and 3, respectively. The technique used in Group B had better pull of muscle, symmetry, faster recovery time, and better motor control at 1-year follow-up than the conventional technique. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The difference between the two groups is due to preservation of original muscular architecture, vascular channel supply. As the muscle is not traumatized, no fibrosis occurs aiding regaining of normal function. In addition, the facial reanimation is more successful in the Group B. The mechanism and success behind the technique used in Group B is discussed elaborately in terms of localregional anatomy and physiology
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5343639
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53436392017-03-15 Temporalis pull-through vs fascia lata augmentation in facial reanimation for facial paralysis Balaji, S. M. Ann Maxillofac Surg Original Article - Comparative Study OBJECTIVES: Surgical rehabilitation of facial palsy is challenging as each case is unique and success rate is often unpredictable. In one technique, temporalis is elevated from origin preserving vessels, and this elevation increases the length which is tunneled into buccal tissues (pull-through technique, Group A). In the other technique, a harvested fascia lata is attached to temporalis after a coronoidectomy release and the fascia lata is attached to the modiolus (Group B). The aim of this study is to compare the two different surgical techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Case records of 22 cases, 15 females, and 7 males who were operated between 2008 and 2012 for facial palsy with at least 1-year follow-up, using either of the techniques were assessed for pull of muscle, postoperative pain, recovery time, motor control, and symmetry at rest. Descriptive statistics are presented. RESULTS: The Group A (n = 7) and Group B (n = 15) formed the study group. In the Group A, residual asymmetry (n = 3), poor postoperative muscle pull (n = 2) were noticed while in the modified group it was 2 and 3, respectively. The technique used in Group B had better pull of muscle, symmetry, faster recovery time, and better motor control at 1-year follow-up than the conventional technique. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The difference between the two groups is due to preservation of original muscular architecture, vascular channel supply. As the muscle is not traumatized, no fibrosis occurs aiding regaining of normal function. In addition, the facial reanimation is more successful in the Group B. The mechanism and success behind the technique used in Group B is discussed elaborately in terms of localregional anatomy and physiology Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC5343639/ /pubmed/28299269 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2231-0746.200323 Text en Copyright: © 2017 Annals of Maxillofacial Surgery http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article - Comparative Study
Balaji, S. M.
Temporalis pull-through vs fascia lata augmentation in facial reanimation for facial paralysis
title Temporalis pull-through vs fascia lata augmentation in facial reanimation for facial paralysis
title_full Temporalis pull-through vs fascia lata augmentation in facial reanimation for facial paralysis
title_fullStr Temporalis pull-through vs fascia lata augmentation in facial reanimation for facial paralysis
title_full_unstemmed Temporalis pull-through vs fascia lata augmentation in facial reanimation for facial paralysis
title_short Temporalis pull-through vs fascia lata augmentation in facial reanimation for facial paralysis
title_sort temporalis pull-through vs fascia lata augmentation in facial reanimation for facial paralysis
topic Original Article - Comparative Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5343639/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28299269
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2231-0746.200323
work_keys_str_mv AT balajism temporalispullthroughvsfascialataaugmentationinfacialreanimationforfacialparalysis