A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Neurotization Preferences in Smile Reanimation: A Discrete Choice Experiment. | LitMetric

Neurotization Preferences in Smile Reanimation: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Plast Reconstr Surg

From the Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Massachusetts Eye and Ear and Harvard Medical School; and Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Royal Australasian College of Surgeons and University of Sydney.

Published: September 2021

Background: Common donor nerve options in smile reanimation include ipsilateral trigeminal motor or contralateral facial nerve branches. Neurotization preference may be influenced by multiple factors, whose relative importance remains poorly understood. In this article, decision-making in smile reanimation is assessed using a stated preference model.

Methods: Qualitative interviews with facial palsy patients identified five relevant attributes for study: smile type ("smile when biting" versus "smile spontaneously" as proxies for trigeminal versus cross-facial neurotization), number of operations, success rates, complication rates, and side effects. Community volunteers (n = 250) completed a discrete-choice experiment relevant to free muscle transfer for smile reanimation. Preoperative and postoperative states were demonstrated through video vignettes, together with explanation of surgical risks, consequences, and benefits. Attribute importance was modeled using hierarchical Bayes estimation.

Results: Two hundred forty-one responses met quality controls. Attribute importance ranked as follows: chance of success, 37.3 percent; smile type, 21.4 percent; side effects, 13.9 percent; complication rates, 13.8; and number of operations, 13.6 percent. All attributes significantly correlated with decision making (p < 0.0001). An aggregate response model revealed most participants (67.6 percent; standard error, 3.0 percent) preferred smile reanimation by cross-facial (assuming a success rate of 80 percent) as opposed to ipsilateral trigeminal motor branch neurotization. When the success rate for cross-facial neurotization was reduced below 67 percent, trigeminal neurotization was preferred.

Conclusions: Despite a higher risk of failure, most respondents preferred a cross-facial as opposed to trigeminal neurotization strategy for smile reanimation. These findings highlight the complexity of decision-making and need for individualized risk tolerance assessment in the field of facial reanimation.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000008302DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

smile reanimation
24
smile
8
ipsilateral trigeminal
8
trigeminal motor
8
smile type
8
cross-facial neurotization
8
number operations
8
complication rates
8
side effects
8
percent
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!