Scholarlink

Background <p>Facial trauma repair requires precise reconstruction while preserving aesthetic units. Traditional local anesthesia can distort tissue planes and compromise surgical precision.</p> Methods <p>This prospective study evaluated landmark-based nerve blocks versus local infiltration for complex facial laceration repair in emergency settings from January 2022 through February 2023. A total of 162 patients were randomized to receive either landmark-based nerve blocks (<i>n </i>= 80) or traditional local anesthesia (<i>n </i>= 82). The nerve block group received targeted injections at anatomical landmarks, while the control group received traditional wound margin infiltration.</p> Results <p>The nerve block group demonstrated significantly reduced anesthetic volume (2.03 ± 0.82&#xa0;mL vs. 4.94 ± 1.71&#xa0;mL, <i>p </i>&lt; 0.001), lower pain scores (median 2 vs. 5, <i>p </i>&lt; 0.001), and better preservation of facial topography with reduced tissue distortion (0.6 ± 0.5 vs. 1.8 ± 0.7, <i>p</i>&lt;0.001). Superior maintenance of anatomical landmarks (96.3% vs. 88.4%, <i>p </i>= 0.02), aesthetic subunit symmetry (94.8% vs. 87.2%, <i>p </i>= 0.03), and cosmetic junction line alignment (95.5% vs. 86.9%, <i>p </i>= 0.02) was observed in the nerve block group. Three-month POSAS scores showed better outcomes in the nerve block group for both observer and patient assessments (<i>p </i>&lt; 0.01).</p> Conclusions <p>While some technical challenges exist with zygomaticofacial and zygomaticotemporal blocks, landmark-based nerve blocks represent an effective approach for complex facial laceration repair, offering improved surgical precision and patient comfort.</p> Level of Evidence II <p>This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors <a href="http://www.springer.com/00266">www.springer.com/00266</a>.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Aesthetic Unit Preservation in Emergency Facial Lacerations: A Prospective Evaluation of Landmark-Based Nerve Blocks

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年1月14日

查看全文
  • Chen Chen,
  • Jie Mi,
  • Ling Zhou,
  • Fei Li

摘要

Background

Facial trauma repair requires precise reconstruction while preserving aesthetic units. Traditional local anesthesia can distort tissue planes and compromise surgical precision.

Methods

This prospective study evaluated landmark-based nerve blocks versus local infiltration for complex facial laceration repair in emergency settings from January 2022 through February 2023. A total of 162 patients were randomized to receive either landmark-based nerve blocks (n = 80) or traditional local anesthesia (n = 82). The nerve block group received targeted injections at anatomical landmarks, while the control group received traditional wound margin infiltration.

Results

The nerve block group demonstrated significantly reduced anesthetic volume (2.03 ± 0.82 mL vs. 4.94 ± 1.71 mL, p < 0.001), lower pain scores (median 2 vs. 5, p < 0.001), and better preservation of facial topography with reduced tissue distortion (0.6 ± 0.5 vs. 1.8 ± 0.7, p<0.001). Superior maintenance of anatomical landmarks (96.3% vs. 88.4%, p = 0.02), aesthetic subunit symmetry (94.8% vs. 87.2%, p = 0.03), and cosmetic junction line alignment (95.5% vs. 86.9%, p = 0.02) was observed in the nerve block group. Three-month POSAS scores showed better outcomes in the nerve block group for both observer and patient assessments (p < 0.01).

Conclusions

While some technical challenges exist with zygomaticofacial and zygomaticotemporal blocks, landmark-based nerve blocks represent an effective approach for complex facial laceration repair, offering improved surgical precision and patient comfort.

Level of Evidence II

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.