MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103826422 · doi:10.1001/archfaci.10.4.224

Applications of GORE-TEX Implants in Rhinoplasty Reexamined After 17 Years

2008· article· en· W2103826422 on OpenAlex
K Conrad, Cory Torgerson, Grant S. Gillman

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Facial Plastic Surgery · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNasal Surgery and Airway Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMedicineRhinoplastySurgeryImplantSoft tissuePatient satisfactionPremaxillaNoseDentistryRetrospective cohort studyColumellaMaxilla

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of GORE-TEX (W. L. Gore & Associates Inc, Flagstaff, Arizona) alloplast in rhinoplasty. DESIGN: A 17-year retrospective medical chart review at a teaching hospital, community hospital, and private facial cosmetic surgery center. A total of 521 patients (122 male and 399 female; age range, 13-70 years) were followed for 12 months to 17 years. All patients had undergone GORE-TEX implantation rhinoplasty (685 implants in 158 primary procedures and 508 secondary procedures) performed by 1 surgeon. Patient satisfaction, expressed with respect to desired cosmetic benefit and functional outcome, and physician assessment, based on aesthetic improvement, technical considerations, and complications, were evaluated. Results were assessed according to the follow-up notes in the medical chart reflecting patients' and surgeon's comments and full preoperative and postoperative photographic documentation. RESULTS: GORE-TEX alloplasts, 1 to 10 mm thick, implanted in the nasal dorsum (n = 264), lateral nasal wall (n = 252), supratip dorsum (n = 85), and premaxilla (n = 84) showed excellent stability and tissue tolerance. Biological complications that required implant removal occurred in 1.9% of patients and included infection, soft tissue swelling, migration, and extrusion. CONCLUSIONS: With the exception of the nasal tip, columella, or problems in which corrections would require rigidity of the grafted or implanted material, the GORE-TEX alloplast is a safe, inexpensive, and predictable alternative to autografts. In the present series, more than 95% of implants used were 1 to 4 mm thick. In the remaining 5%, 6 implants ranged from 8 to 10 mm thick, and we found them acceptable. It is our opinion that for both primary and secondary rhinoplasty with adequate endonasal and external soft tissue coverage, GORE-TEX should be strongly considered for major and minor corrections of the nasal wall and bridge in properly selected patients.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.506

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it