Effect of Costal Harvesting Technique on Postoperative Donor-site Morbidity: Does Muscle Sparing Technique Cause Less Postoperative Pain ? A Clinical Trial (COSTA)

Effect of Costal Harvesting Technique on Postoperative Donor-site Morbidity: Does Muscle Sparing Technique Cause Less Postoperative Pain ? A Clinical Trial

Effect of Costal Harvesting Technique on Postoperative Donor-site Morbidity: Does Muscle Sparing Technique Cause Less Postoperative Pain ? A Clinical Trial

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of 'muscle sparing technique' while harvesting costal/rib cartilage on postoperative donor-site morbidity -namely postoperative pain. Although authors report 'muscle sparing technique' cause less pain its not investigated in an evidence-based-medicine perspective. Therefore the investigators are planning a controlled, prospective clinical trial to compare the conventional method and 'muscle sparing technique'. Effect of Costal Harvesting Technique on Postoperative Donor-site Morbidity: Does Muscle Sparing Technique Cause Less Postoperative Pain ? A Clinical Trial

Revision rhinoplasty patients requiring costal cartilage were enrolled in the study. All costal cartilage harvestings were full-thickness and they were carried out by a single-surgeon (Berke Ozucer). Patients were randomly assigned either to 'Conservative Muscle-cuttingHarvesting Technique' or 'Muscle-sparing Harvesting Technique'. Surgical technique costal cartilage harvesting in both groups were identical expect this: M-Cutting group : Following skin incision with No.15 blade; all layers including the subcutaneous fat, muscle fascia and muscles covering the cartilage were cut with Monopolar electrocautery at (25 watts). M-Sparing group: : Following skin incision with No.15 blade; all layers including the subcutaneous fat, muscle fascia and muscles covering the cartilage were passed with blunt dissection. Muscle fibers were dissected parallel to their positioning. Postoperative pain was evaluated with a Visual Analogue Scale. Participants were questioned regarding their donor-site pain and asked to score their pain 0 (minimum and 10 (maximum). Passive state and pain while active was evaluated separately. This evaluation was carried out at 6th postoperative hour, first, second, third postoperative-days, first postoperative week, on 15th ,30th and 45th day postoperatively. Also postoperative need for analgesics were also noted for the first three days. Muscle-cutting and muscle-sparing groups were analysed for mean ± Standard deviation values. These values were compared statistically to assess whether muscle-sparing technique has a significant effect on reduced postoperative pain.

Following skin incision with No.15 blade; all layers including the subcutaneous fat, muscle fascia and muscles covering the cartilage were passed with blunt dissection. Muscle fibers were dissected parallel to their positioning.

Following skin incision with No.15 blade; all layers including the subcutaneous fat, muscle fascia and muscles covering the cartilage were cut with Monopolar electrocautery at (25 watts).

Postoperative pain and its change from baseline to 45th postoperative day will be evaluated with Visual Analogue Scale

Inclusion Criteria: Revision rhinoplasty when costal cartilage is harvested full-thickness Exclusion Criteria: Fibromyalgia No consent When patient does not comply with follow-up

Fedok FG. Costal Cartilage Grafts in Rhinoplasty. Clin Plast Surg. 2016 Jan;43(1):201-12. doi: 10.1016/j.cps.2015.08.002. Epub 2015 Oct 24.

Cochran CS. Harvesting Rib Cartilage in Primary and Secondary Rhinoplasty. Clin Plast Surg. 2016 Jan;43(1):195-200. doi: 10.1016/j.cps.2015.09.018. Epub 2015 Oct 23.