FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3044486890> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3044486890 endingPage "10" @default.
• W3044486890 startingPage "9" @default.
• W3044486890 abstract "Archives of Facial Plastic SurgeryVol. 14, No. 1 Free AccessThe Nasal Valve DilemmaThe Narrow Straw vs the Weak WallJohn S. Rhee and Julia S. KimbellJohn S. RheeCorrespondence: Dr Rhee, Department of Otolaryngology and Communication Sciences, Medical College of Wisconsin Clinic at Froedtert West, 9200 W Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, WI 53226 (E-mail Address: jrhee@mcw.edu).Department of Otolaryngology and Communication Sciences, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee (Dr Rhee); and Department of Otolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill (Dr Kimbell).Search for more papers by this author and Julia S. KimbellDepartment of Otolaryngology and Communication Sciences, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee (Dr Rhee); and Department of Otolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill (Dr Kimbell).Search for more papers by this authorPublished Online:2 Jan 2012AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB Permissions & CitationsPermissionsDownload CitationsTrack CitationsAdd to favorites Back To Publication ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail In its simplest anatomical definition, the nasal cavity may be viewed as a longitudinal set of cross-sectional area segments that act as resistors in series, with the overall resistance being dominated by a single flow-limiting region with the least cross-sectional area, ie, the narrowest segment of the “straw.” A great deal of attention has been placed on identification of this resistive segment. This is the region of the nasal valve—internal, external, and the area in between.As air enters this constricted segment of the airway, acceleration of the airflow occurs. This results in a drop in intraluminal pressure by the Bernoulli principle. The pressure drop can lead to collapse of this segment of the airway during inspiration. Even minor structural deviations of the septum, inferior turbinate, or lateral nasal wall can constrict the nasal valve region and have a great effect on nasal airflow. In addition the intrinsic tensile strength of the “straw walls” affect the ability to withstand the pressure drop that drives the airflow. Given that the septum and turbinate are usually the more rigid structures, it is usually the lateral nasal wall that is the determinant of the nasal valve rigidity.Surgical correction of 1 or all 3 anatomic deviations (septum, turbinate, and lateral nasal wall) can lead to symptomatic improvement in nasal obstruction. However, it can be difficult to differentiate which of the 3 elements is the most responsible component for the nasal airway obstruction symptoms for any given patient.1 The surgical philosophies usually fall into the following broad categories:Increasing the diameter of the “straw”—straightening the septum, reducing the turbinate, or lateralizing the lateral nasal wall;Increasing the rigidity of the lateral nasal wall;Or both.Available diagnostic tools are limited in the information that is provided to the surgeons in their preoperative assessment and planning. In the ideal setting, the algorithm would allow for the least complex surgery to progress to the more complex ones, eg, would addressing the septum alone be sufficient to increase the diameter of the straw without the need to lateralize and/or increase the rigidity or lateral wall?The study by Zoumalan et al2 provides a context for these questions. With the application of a simulated pressure drop, the nasal valve resistor was tested for its increased diameter and/or the lateral wall strength. It is a simple yet elegant objective measure of improvement that provides feedback in real time and is easily available during surgery at no additional cost. To some extent, the authors also illustrate an algorithmic use of this tool in deciding not to progress from cephalic turn-in flaps to grafts in 2 patients when lateral wall stability was deemed sufficient.In addition to presenting these features of the method, this study also raises some interesting questions about airflow and pressure effects. As the authors note, the method uses reversed flow through the nose, inducing collapse in a nonphysiologic way. While this aspect of the method does not invalidate its usefulness, it is interesting to note that the natural passage of expired air dilates the nasal vestibule rather than collapsing it. The authors' assessment that depression induced by suction appeared identical to depression seen on strong inspiration was based on external examination. It would be interesting to know if the motion is similar internally as well.Zoumalan et al2 report that the suction used had a minimum pressure of −80 kPa, which is vastly more negative than the pressure that is naturally present in the nose, even during deep breathing. A drawback of the method is an inability to quantify the actual amount of negative pressure applied. In using this method, the surgeon would likely need to develop a feel for the attenuation of this pressure, possibly by adjusting the proximity of the tubing to the nostrils. Because the level of pressure applied is unknown, is it possible that the use of overly negative pressure to judge the sufficiency of repair may lead to overcorrection or overstabilization in some way?The authors also report that airflow through the suction tubing was set to 50 L/min. This is high for normal nasal airflow, as would be expected from the overly negative pressure in the tubing. While 50 L/min is consistent with physiological airflow rates induced by breathing during exercise, many people switch at such rates from nasal to oronasal breathing, reducing the amount of airflow passing through the nose and thus the nasal resistance. Again, forcing more airflow through the nasal passages than would normally be withstood may be leading to an underestimation of the adequacy of repair.The study by Zoumalan et al2 suggests some interesting avenues to explore further. Control of the pressure applied would provide consistency and allow additional study of the amount and variations of pressure needed in different cases to induce depression. Gradation of surgical effects would also be possible. Internal as well as external examination of applied pressure-induced depression would provide information on the strength of other aspects of vestibular anatomy. This information might provide a way to separate septal and lateral wall contributions to the repair so that maneuvers making the most important changes could be discriminated.Nevertheless, this study objectively affirms that existing intraoperative surgical techniques for treatment of the nasal valve region improve the ability to overcome a negative pressure drop. Whether that is due to increasing the diameter of the straw or increasing the rigidity of the wall or both is unclear. Also, as noted by the authors, an additional limitation of the study is the lack of patient symptomatology correlation with the final postoperative outcome. However, this study highlights that even the simplest of tools are powerful in providing objective evidence that surgical techniques are effective in addressing the constricted nasal airflow problem. The challenge moving forward is to further refine the evidence to match the intricacies of this surgical problem.Financial Disclosure: None reported.REFERENCESRhee JS. Measuring outcomes in nasal surgery: realities and possibilities.. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2009;11(6):416–419 19917906 Abstract, Google ScholarZoumalan RA, Larrabee WFJr, Murakami CS. Intraoperative suction-assisted evaluation of the nasal valve in rhinoplasty.. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2012;14(1):qoa11001634–38 Google ScholarFiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byThe Effects of Lateral Crural Tensioning with an Articulated Alar Rim Graft Versus Lateral Crural Strut Graft on Nasal Function Mickey Kondo, Carolyn Orgain, Raquel Alvarado, George N. Marcells, and Richard J. Harvey2 July 2020 | Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine, Vol. 22, No. 4Use of Spreader Flaps Without Dorsal Hump Reduction and the Effect on Nasal Function Justin C. Sowder, Andrew J. Thomas, Cristian D. Gonzalez, Nikhil S. Limaye, and Preston Daniel Ward22 January 2020 | JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery, Vol. 19, No. 4Outcome of Nasal Valve Obstruction After Functional and Aesthetic-Functional Rhinoplasty Andrea Yeung, Basil Hassouneh, and David W. Kim17 March 2016 | JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery, Vol. 18, No. 2Costal Cartilage Lateral Crural Strut Graft vs Cephalic Crural Turn-in for Correction of External Valve Dysfunction Henry P. Barham, Anna Knisely, Jenna Christensen, Raymond Sacks, George N. Marcells, and Richard J. Harvey17 September 2015 | JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery, Vol. 17, No. 5Airflow and Patient-Perceived Improvement Following Rhinoplastic Correction of External Nasal Valve Dysfunction Tom Palesy, Eleanor Pratt, Nadine Mrad, George N. Marcells, and Richard J. Harvey19 March 2015 | JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery, Vol. 17, No. 2 Volume 14Issue 1Jan 2012 InformationCopyright 2012 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved. Applicable FARS/DFARS Restrictions Apply to Government Use.To cite this article:John S. Rhee and Julia S. Kimbell.The Nasal Valve Dilemma.Archives of Facial Plastic Surgery.Jan 2012.9-10.http://doi.org/10.1001/archfaci.2011.1450Published in Volume: 14 Issue 1: January 2, 2012PDF download" @default.
• W3044486890 created "2020-07-29" @default.
• W3044486890 creator A5068964774 @default.
• W3044486890 creator A5087087768 @default.
• W3044486890 date "2012-01-02" @default.
• W3044486890 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W3044486890 title "The Nasal Valve Dilemma" @default.
• W3044486890 cites W3023923770 @default.
• W3044486890 cites W4256279319 @default.
• W3044486890 doi "https://doi.org/10.1001/archfaci.2011.1450" @default.
• W3044486890 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W3044486890 type Work @default.
• W3044486890 sameAs 3044486890 @default.
• W3044486890 citedByCount "5" @default.
• W3044486890 countsByYear W30444868902015 @default.
• W3044486890 countsByYear W30444868902016 @default.
• W3044486890 countsByYear W30444868902017 @default.
• W3044486890 countsByYear W30444868902020 @default.
• W3044486890 countsByYear W30444868902023 @default.
• W3044486890 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3044486890 hasAuthorship W3044486890A5068964774 @default.
• W3044486890 hasAuthorship W3044486890A5087087768 @default.
• W3044486890 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W3044486890 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W3044486890 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W3044486890 hasConcept C2776050027 @default.
• W3044486890 hasConcept C2778311950 @default.
• W3044486890 hasConcept C2778496695 @default.
• W3044486890 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W3044486890 hasConceptScore W3044486890C111472728 @default.
• W3044486890 hasConceptScore W3044486890C138885662 @default.
• W3044486890 hasConceptScore W3044486890C141071460 @default.
• W3044486890 hasConceptScore W3044486890C2776050027 @default.
• W3044486890 hasConceptScore W3044486890C2778311950 @default.
• W3044486890 hasConceptScore W3044486890C2778496695 @default.
• W3044486890 hasConceptScore W3044486890C71924100 @default.
• W3044486890 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W3044486890 hasLocation W30444868901 @default.
• W3044486890 hasOpenAccess W3044486890 @default.
• W3044486890 hasPrimaryLocation W30444868901 @default.
• W3044486890 hasRelatedWork W1586374228 @default.
• W3044486890 hasRelatedWork W2003938723 @default.
• W3044486890 hasRelatedWork W2047967234 @default.
• W3044486890 hasRelatedWork W2118496982 @default.
• W3044486890 hasRelatedWork W2364998975 @default.
• W3044486890 hasRelatedWork W2369162477 @default.
• W3044486890 hasRelatedWork W2439875401 @default.
• W3044486890 hasRelatedWork W2556701151 @default.
• W3044486890 hasRelatedWork W4238867864 @default.
• W3044486890 hasRelatedWork W2525756941 @default.
• W3044486890 hasVolume "14" @default.
• W3044486890 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3044486890 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3044486890 magId "3044486890" @default.
• W3044486890 workType "article" @default.