Choice of Surgeons in Retractors used in Cleft Lip and Palate Surgery: An Original Research

Author:

Gopalakrishna Sagar1,Rajmohan M.2,Thakkar Radhika3,Ramesh Kannur Jnanesh4,Kamadal Neelamma5,Malhotra Aayush6,Tiwari Rahul V. C.7

Affiliation:

1. Department of Dentistry, Kodagu Institute of Medical Sciences, Madikeri, Karnataka, India

2. Department of Dental Surgery, KAPV Government Medical College and Hospital, Trichy, Tamil Nadu, India

3. BDS, Eastman Institute for Oral Health, University of Rochester, New York, United States

4. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Consultant, Harneshwar Multi-Speciality Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India

5. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Al Ameen Dental College, Vijayapura, Karnataka, India

6. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, M.M. College of Dental Sciences and Research, Maharishi Markandeshwar (Deemed to be University), Mullana, Ambala, Haryana, India

7. Consultant, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeon, OMNI and Andhra Hospitals, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background: To ensure optimal exposure and enable precise tissue manipulation, cleft lip and palate abnormalities require surgical repair utilizing retractors. Different retractors may affect surgical outcomes; however, this is not yet evident. Examining surgeon preferences for retractors in cleft lip and palate surgery and assessing their impact on patient outcomes were the goals of this study. Materials and Methods: The patients who underwent primary cleft lip and palate repair were retrospectively analyzed. This study evaluated three widely used retractors: the Langenbeck, Gelpi, and Moult Mouth Gag retractors. This study looked at demographic information, surgical results (including scarring, aesthetic outcomes, and wound healing issues), and surgeon preferences for retractors. Results: The study identified differences in surgical outcomes related to various retractor types. Both Group A (Langenbeck retractor) and Group B (Gelpi retractor) demonstrated similar favorable results, such as little wound healing issues, less scarring, and pleasing cosmetic results. The wound healing issues, scarring, and cosmetic outcomes were all worse in Group C (Moult Mouth Gag retractor). Conclusion: Retractors were not always preferred by surgeons doing cleft lip and palate surgery. The type of retractor had an impact on the surgical results; the Moult Mouth Gag retractor performed less well than the Langenbeck and Gelpi retractors. These results highlight the value of using evidence-based criteria to select retractors more effectively and enhance surgical methods for better patient outcomes in cleft lip and palate repair.

Publisher

Medknow

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3