Revision rhinoplasty: measurement of patient-reported outcomes and analysis of predictive factors

BACKGROUND: Considering that revision rhinoplasty is one of the most difficult plastic surgical procedures, evaluating patient satisfaction is fundamental in order to determine success and identify variables that may affect the outcomes. Our first study objective was to determine satisfaction levels in revision patients and to compare results with those obtained in primary rhinoplasty patients. Second, we sought to identify factors that may influence the degree of satisfaction. METHODS: Satisfaction was evaluated in 54 revision and 54 primary rhinoplasty patients using the rhinoplasty outcome evaluation questionnaire. To identify associated factors, patients were assessed for demographic characteristics, medical history, follow-up time, reason for revision, graft usage, the severity of nasal deformity, and satisfaction with the provided care and information given before the surgery. RESULTS: All revision and primary rhinoplasty patients experienced improvements in satisfaction scores. Although the improvements were higher in primary rhinoplasty patients, the levels obtained in revision patients can be considered high. We found that young and male patients tend to have less satisfaction increment after the surgery. Patients who underwent revision for aesthetic reasons had higher improvements in satisfaction scores when compared to those patients who underwent revision for a combination of aesthetic and functional reasons. The improvement in satisfaction scores in patients who were satisfied with the information given before surgery was higher. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that significant patient satisfaction is achieved after revision rhinoplasty and highlight the importance of the informed consent process when planning revision, especially on young and male patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40064-016-3166-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Current Practices in Monitoring Children and Adults With X-linked Hypophosphatemia: A Global Survey of Expert Experience

This report provides recommendations for X-linked hypophosphatemia (XLH) monitoring based on current monitoring practices of experts in the management of XLH in children (<18 years) and adults. We surveyed 43 international experts in XLH to determine their monitoring practices for children and adults with XLH, including pregnant and lactating women. In the initial evaluation of children and adults with XLH, experts consistently obtain a family history of XLH or hypophosphatemia, a history of fractures and dental infections, and assess pain through age-appropriate clinical interviews or caregiver reports. They measure height, weight, and blood pressure and conduct DNA analysis of multiple genes associated with hypophosphatemia including the PHEX gene. For children follow-up, experts arrange follow-up every 3 to 6 months assessing height, weight, and blood pressure and examining for skeletal deformities. Laboratory tests in children include serum phosphorus, corrected total/ionized calcium, alkaline phosphatase, renal function, and PTH and spot morning urine for calcium, creatinine, and phosphorus. During adult follow-up, experts assess patients every 6 to 12 months, with a clinical examination focused on skeletal deformities and joint involvement. The laboratory profile is completed at least once a year. In the presence of bone pain, experts conduct X-rays both in children and adults to evaluate for fractures or joint damage. With respect to nephrocalcinosis, renal ultrasound is suggested on an annual basis or less frequently when monitoring children and adults with XLH. Experts conduct a dental assessment at baseline and then every 6 to 12 months for all patients with XLH. The findings of the survey inform practice for assessing new patients with XLH, monitoring existing patients, and identifying areas for future research. All recommendations based on these practices are weak with very low-quality evidence

X-Linked Hypophosphatemia Management in Children: An International Working Group Clinical Practice Guideline

Context: An International Working Group (IWG) developed new guidelines on the diagnosis, evaluation, management, and monitoring of X-linked hypophosphatemia (XLH) in children. Over the past 5 years, important advances have occurred in our understanding of the presentation, complications, and treatment of XLH. Methods: A group of 50 international experts in XLH from Canada, the United States, Europe, Asia, and South America, along with methodology experts and a patient partner, held 18 teleconference meetings in 2023-2024. These meetings addressed key issues regarding diagnosing, evaluating, managing, and monitoring XLH in children. Two systematic reviews were conducted to examine the impact of burosumab compared to conventional therapy (phosphate salts and active vitamin D) or no therapy, and to assess the impact of conventional therapy vs no therapy on patient-important outcomes. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Additionally, narrative reviews were completed on XLH diagnosis and the role of genetic testing, and an expert clinical practice survey informed the monitoring recommendations. Outcomes: An approach to establishing the diagnosis of XLH is presented. GRADEd recommendations were developed on treatment strategies for XLH in children. Monitoring recommendations, GRADEd as weak with very low certainty, were based on clinical practice survey of the IWG experts. The guidelines also addressed dental complications and proposed potential strategies to mitigate them. Conclusion: These clinical practice guidelines provide an update of the current evidence on the diagnosis and management of XLH and provide a comprehensive guidance for multidisciplinary healthcare professionals involved in the care of children with XLH

Symptoms and management of cow's milk allergy: perception and evidence

IntroductionThe diagnosis and management of cow's milk allergy (CMA) is a topic of debate and controversy. Our aim was to compare the opinions of expert groups from the Middle East (n = 14) and the European Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) (n = 13).MethodsThese Expert groups voted on statements that were developed by the ESPGHAN group and published in a recent position paper. The voting outcome was compared.ResultsOverall, there was consensus amongst both groups of experts. Experts agreed that symptoms of crying, irritability and colic, as single manifestation, are not suggestive of CMA. They agreed that amino-acid based formula (AAF) should be reserved for severe cases (e.g., malnutrition and anaphylaxis) and that there is insufficient evidence to recommend a step-down approach. There was no unanimous consensus on the statement that a cow's milk based extensively hydrolysed formula (eHF) should be the first choice as a diagnostic elimination diet in mild/moderate cases. Although the statements regarding the role for hydrolysed rice formula as a diagnostic and therapeutic elimination diet were accepted, 3/27 disagreed. The votes regarding soy formula highlight the differences in opinion in the role of soy protein in CMA dietary treatment. Generally, soy-based formula is seldom available in the Middle-East region. All ESPGHAN experts agreed that there is insufficient evidence that the addition of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics increase the efficacy of elimination diets regarding CMA symptoms (despite other benefits such as decrease of infections and antibiotic intake), whereas 3/14 of the Middle East group thought there was sufficient evidence.DiscussionDifferences in voting are related to geographical, cultural and other conditions, such as cost and availability. This emphasizes the need to develop region-specific guidelines considering social and cultural conditions, and to perform further research in this area