4.2 Article

Four Different Reasons of Subcutaneous Emphysema With or Without Pneumomediastinum and Pneumothorax After Facial Bone Surgery

Journal

JOURNAL OF CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY
Volume 33, Issue 6, Pages E616-E620

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000008693

Keywords

Orthognathic surgery; plastic surgery; pneumomediastinum; pneumothorax; subcutaneous emphysema

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The present study reports a rare case series of subcutaneous emphysema with or without pneumomediastinum and pneumothorax after orthognathic and facial bone contouring surgery, compares their clinical and radiologic findings, and suggests precautions.
In the present study, the authors report rare case series with subcutaneous emphysema with or without pneumomediastinum and pneumothorax after orthognathic and facial bone contouring surgery, compare their clinical and radiologic findings, and suggest precautions. Four patients who showed subcutaneous emphysema on follow up chest X-ray and computed tomography after orthognathic and facial bone contouring surgery were included in the study. In all cases post-op subcutaneous emphysema were detected, however, the aspect and mechanisms of post-op air spread were all different. After the conservative management with administering the O-2 by nasal cannula or endotracheal tube, the symptoms were relieved except 1 patient who needed chest tube insertion and further supra-sternal incision. In conclusion, subcutaneous emphysema with or without pneumomediastinum and pneumothorax after orthognathic and facial bone contouring surgery can be occurred by cervical fascia injury or alveolar ruptures. To preventing those complications, traumatic naso-tracheal intubation, excessive positive pressure ventilation, intermaxillary fixation immediate after the surgery, and increase of intra-alveolar pressure of the patients should be avoided.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available