RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Lip repositioning is a conservative surgical technique used to treat excess gingival display. An array of modifications has been introduced to the technique over time and as studies show the technique and its modifications to be successful, there is little standardized information for clinicians to make informed decisions when choosing this technique for the treatment of patients with excessive gingival display (EGD). OBJECTIVES: To review the current literature on the topic of lip repositioning for the treatment of excessive EGD, exploring outcome, and result longevity. METHODS: A structured systematic search was carried out using the Ovid database and Web of Science to identify published studies on lip repositioning technique. Search was restricted to studies in the English language, describing a surgical intervention. Case reports were included as the number of published studies was limited. RESULTS: The electronic search identified 93 articles, hand search identified 1 article, and reference search identified 1 article. After excluding duplicates and screening articles, a total of 22 articles met the inclusion criteria. An estimated mean improvement of 3.4 mm (95% confidence interval, 3.0-3.8 mm) was found possible with lip repositioning. Data analysis was performed using only 4 studies, amounting to a total of 33 patients. Potential risk of bias was identified in some of the studies included. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the limited available studies on lip repositioning, an estimated mean improvement of 3.4 mm was found to be possible with surgical lip repositioning, suggesting that the technique could be used successfully to treat EGD. However, more studies are necessary to properly evaluate the treatment approach and stability of the technique. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Recently, the demand for esthetics has significantly increased, driven by increased patient awareness and the search for an ideal smile. Creating the perfect smile is an intricate process that requires a multidisciplinary approach, with careful consideration of the lips and the gingival outline. Excess gingival display results in an unaesthetic smile, lip repositioning offers a comparatively simple solution for this problem. While the quality literature on this topic is limited statistical analysis of collected studies show that an estimated mean improvement of 3.4 mm can be achieved with surgical lip repositioning.
Asunto(s)
Estética Dental , Labio , Encía , Gingivectomía , Humanos , Labio/cirugía , SonrisaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Over-the-counter analgesics (OTCAs), principally paracetamol (acetaminophen)-containing compounds and NSAIDs, are commonly used medications. Guidelines for the use of these agents in patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) are not available, despite the possibility that such patients may be more susceptible to the effects of an adverse reaction. Notwithstanding the lack of guidelines for healthcare providers, patients are often counselled to modify their use of these drugs. Therefore, the primary aim of this study was to assess healthcare providers' recommendations on how OTCAs should be used by patients with CLD. METHODS: An 11-question web-based survey was distributed via email to healthcare providers participating in four healthcare networks in the US, to determine what recommendations they make to patients with cirrhosis (compensated and decompensated) and chronic hepatitis regarding the use of paracetamol and NSAIDs. Healthcare providers were also queried about the recommendations they make to patients with cirrhosis regarding pain control, and on the use of paracetamol for patients who consume alcohol daily. RESULTS: Overall, a 12% response rate was obtained. Internal medicine, family practice, paediatrics, and gastroenterology were the most represented practice types. Recommendations against the use of NSAIDs were significantly less common than recommendations against paracetamol use, in cases of both compensated and decompensated cirrhosis (p = 0.001). Non-gastroenterologists and non-primary care physicians were the least likely to recommend against NSAID use (p = 0.001), while gastroenterologists were the least likely to recommend against paracetamol in these patients (p = 0.001). It was the recommendation of most respondents that OTCAs should be avoided in patients with cirrhosis, and that paracetamol should be avoided or its dose reduced in the setting of daily alcohol use. CONCLUSIONS: Significant variability exists among healthcare providers on their recommendations for OTCA use in the setting of chronic liver disease. Non-gastroenterologists are more likely to recommend against the use of paracetamol than NSAIDs, and patients with chronic liver disease may be under-treated for pain.
Asunto(s)
Analgésicos no Narcóticos/uso terapéutico , Antiinflamatorios no Esteroideos/uso terapéutico , Hepatopatías/complicaciones , Médicos , Acetaminofén/efectos adversos , Acetaminofén/uso terapéutico , Consumo de Bebidas Alcohólicas/efectos adversos , Analgésicos no Narcóticos/efectos adversos , Antiinflamatorios no Esteroideos/efectos adversos , Enfermedad Crónica , Contraindicaciones , Humanos , Internet , Medicamentos sin Prescripción/efectos adversos , Medicamentos sin Prescripción/uso terapéutico , Dolor/complicaciones , Dolor/tratamiento farmacológico , Médicos/estadística & datos numéricos , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The global rise in morbid obesity and associated comorbid diseases concerns a wide range of specialists. Although bariatric surgery has been proven to be an effective, enduring treatment available for morbid obesity, the rates of referral for surgery are not consistent with the number of individuals affected. METHODS: A survey of 478 experienced physicians from 6 specialty areas was conducted to ascertain the attitudes and practices regarding the treatment of morbidly obese patients. RESULTS: Approximately 21% (12% family practitioners and 34% internists) of patients seen by respondents were morbidly obese. Bariatric surgery was perceived as, by far, the most effective morbid obesity treatment available (judged to be effective for 49% of patients). Medical treatments were perceived as effective for <20% of patients (15% drugs and 23% exercise). Despite the respondents' perception that most surgery recipients achieve good to excellent long-term results, only 15.4% of patients were referred for consultation with a surgeon (8.0% for cardiologists and 26.1% for bariatricians). Most physicians were not knowledgeable regarding the National Institutes of Health morbid obesity management guidelines. Few could identify a local bariatric surgeon. The volume of referrals across all 6 specialty groups was low, at an average of 6 patients annually (3 patients for cardiologists and 19 patients for bariatricians). CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study have demonstrated that primary care physicians and subspecialists see a high proportion of morbidly obese patients; however, many are unfamiliar with morbid obesity management and surgical referral guidelines. Even though the perception of surgical effectiveness was quite high, the referrals for surgery were relatively low.