Functional Outcomes after Lateral Crural J-Flap Repair of External Nasal Valve Collapse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the lateral crural J-flap technique in the surgical repair of external nasal valve collapse with standardized and validated outcome measurements. METHODS: Prospective data were gathered on consecutive cases, performed by a single surgeon between 2007 and 2010, of adult patients who underwent a lateral crural approach to repair of external nasal valve collapse. Data were collected on diagnosis, surgical outcomes, and complications. Outcome measures included the Nasal Obstructive Symptom Evaluation and the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation. RESULTS: Fifteen patients were included in the study. Their follow-ups ranged from 9 to 13 months. All patients had statistically significant improvements in Nasal Obstructive Symptom Evaluation scores. There was no significant change in perceived nasal appearance after surgery as measured by the Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation. There were no surgical complications. CONCLUSIONS: The lateral crural J-flap approach to repair of external nasal valve collapse is a technically straightforward and relatively safe procedure. The efficacy is excellent at the 1-year follow-up examination.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".