INTRODUCTION
Nasal bone fracture is the most frequently occurring facial bone fracture, and secondary deformity can be easily noticeable if the fracture is inappropriately treated. In many cases, especially those where it is considered a minor injury, nasal bone fracture can be treated simply and within a short time through the closed reduction (CR) technique [
1]. As the CR technique has limitations, however, compared to the open reduction (OR) technique in terms of the capability for sophisticated manipulations, it is necessary to select the optimal operating technique for individuals depending on their nasal fracture pattern. If surgeons establish a proper surgical plan and apply appropriate surgical skills, they may obtain the best results in terms of the time and cost of the surgery, and of the postoperative degree of patient satisfaction [
2]. To achieve a reliable diagnosis and consistency of the surgical results, it is important to classify nasal bone fracture systemically, and to treat it appropriately by employing the proper therapeutic algorithm [
3].
A treatment algorithm was established according to Stranc's classification system, and some modified versions of the widely known CR technique and the OR through endonasal incision technique were applied. This study aimed to provide useful information about establishing the optimal treatment algorithm for nasal bone fracture by analyzing the treatment results of patients with such fracture type.
DISCUSSION
Nasal bone fracture is the type of facial fracture that is most frequently presented in hospitals that have a facial trauma center [
6]. Many researches on the patterns, characteristics, and operating techniques for such fracture type have been published, and modified treatment methods based on previous treatment experiences exist [
7,
8]. The closed reduction (CR) technique, which is known to have been used since a long time ago, and the indirect OR technique introduced by Burm and Oh [
9] in 1998 were established as operating techniques for treating nasal bone fracture. Various classifications of nasal bone fracture have been announced, but the representative Stranc's classification system is the most widely used. Algorithms on the treatment of nasal bone fracture should be established based on appropriate classification, and treatments for individual patients should be carried out to obtain functionally and aesthetically satisfactory results after nasal bone fracture surgery.
In this study, an attempt was made to find various methods of obtaining the best results by establishing algorithms and applying treatments based on the extensive prior experience of treating patients with nasal bone fracture. Frontal plane 1 fracture was reduced relatively accurately via OR through endonasal incision while observing the movement of the nasal tip in real time using C-arm. Frontal plane 2 and lateral plane 1, 2 fracture were treated with OR through endonasal incision. In the case of comminuted fracture, the broken bone fragments that had been maintained by soft tissue can be scattered when conducting OR, and this may decrease the blood supply in the fractured bone segments [
10]. For this reason, CR was conducted in this study. The range of dissection could be reduced by conducting it at an area closer to the proximal nasal bone rather than the room directly under the internal nasal valve when carrying out a local injection. After an incision was made, mucosal dissection was conducted with a mosquito clamp, and the fractured nasal bone was properly elevated using an elevator. Slight mucosal dissection was carried out, and subperiosteal dissection was not performed separately. The bone growth retardation that might occur after the surgery in pediatric patients was reduced by avoiding subperiosteal dissection [
11].
In this study, k-wire was not used for bone fixation. The disadvantages of k-wire are as follows: (1) as there is no separate device used for fixating the inserted wire, it may fall out; (2) perforation may occur in the frontal sinus or cribriform plate; and (3) as the bent end of the wire is exposed, it may cause inconvenience or soft-tissue damage (e.g., ulceration).
At the same time, as the nasal septum is a key factor in nasal fracture management [
12], a silicone internal nasal septal splint was inserted in the nasal cavity on both sides to sufficiently support the septum after bone reduction. Also, if the need for septoplasty was identified, simultaneous correction of the septum and nasal bone was done through a joint operation with the Ear-Nose-Throat Department.
For nasal packing, a resorbable nasal packing material (Nasopore) was used. This may cause less mucosal injury as it consists of relatively softer materials, and the pressure after insertion is reduced compared to a non-absorbable nasal packing material (e.g., Merocel). In addition, there is no need for removal, which may cause pain and bleeding. In this study, for about a week from the day after the surgery, saline solution was used to irrigate the nasal cavity. At this time, a sufficient amount was instructed to be used (200 mL per application, 3 times a day) to facilitate the fragmentation of the resorbable nasal packing material. This way, the inconvenience of nasal stuffiness and the feeling of irritation that the patients may experience can be resolved as quickly as possible. If necessary, suction was carried out to remove the residue. Some studies reported that such resorbable nasal packing materials might cause infection, but no such complications were observed in this study.
This study has some limitations. As the patients with nasal bone fracture were not hospitalized until a certain period of time had passed, it was difficult to do a long-term follow-up. Also, for some patients with severe comminuted fracture, nasal deformity was often observed due to the limitations of the CR technique [
13]. In such cases, the necessity of conducting secondary rhinoplasty was sufficiently explained to the patients, and rhinoplasty was carried out about six months after the surgery. Also, most of the patients did not receive postoperative CT due to insurance issues.
Satisfactory results were obtained in terms of the nasal contour, the degree of patient satisfaction was found to have significantly improved, and the reported minor complications and pain were relieved. In the patient satisfaction results, the average score was within the “satisfied” to “very satisfied” range, which is considered encouraging. It remains to be seen, however, how much improvement can be attained in the “severely fractured” patient category. More sophisticated reduction can be achieved through the OR technique, which has various advantages over CR. Also, nasal deformity can be reduced by finishing with a septal splint and a resorbable nasal packing material that may reduce the patient inconvenience and side effects, which will pave the way for easy postoperative management. With well-established algorithms based on prior experiences, it is obvious that surgeons can react with consistency to the corresponding treatment policy.