{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Examining timing of periorbital interventions in patients with upper division facial paralysis.
{Author}: Doty S;Goslawski A;Cabrera CI;Tranchito E;Fowler N;Li S;Thuener JE;Teknos TN;Rezaee RP;Rabbani CC;Tamaki A;
{Journal}: Head Neck
{Volume}: 0
{Issue}: 0
{Year}: 2024 Aug 15
{Factor}: 3.821
{DOI}: 10.1002/hed.27893
{Abstract}: <B>BACKGROUND: </B>Facial paralysis is a life-altering condition that may arise from various etiologies, ranging from trauma to malignancy. Permanent facial paralysis may occur secondary to facial nerve sacrifice or irreversible damage to the nerve. In these particularly devastating cases, protection and maintaining function of the eye is paramount. There are many effective lagophthalmos corrective surgical procedures available for these patients. While placement of eyelid weights and lid tightening surgeries are the cornerstone of eyelid rehabilitation, limited information exists on whether the timing of eyelid interventions in the setting of permanent facial paralysis impact outcomes, including need for revision surgery.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>A single-center retrospective chart review was performed for patients with irreversible facial paralysis treated with an upper eyelid weight between 2013 to 2022. Electronic health records were acquired to obtain facial paralysis etiology, associated clinical characteristics, the type of intervention, and the timing of intervention. Patients were classified as immediate if the eyelid weight operation occurred within 29 days of the initial facial paralysis and delayed if the surgery occurred 30 days or more after initial presentation. Outcomes were assessed in terms of revision procedures and surgical complications.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>There were 70 patients in total, with 35 patients in the immediate category and 35 patients in the delayed category. The most common etiology related to parotid gland pathology, and 58.6% of patients had facial paralysis from cancer-related surgeries. There were no significant differences in revision rates (p < 0.208) or in the types of procedures (p = 0.077) between the two groups. The complication rates also did not differ significantly between groups; however, there were only complications in the delayed intervention group.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>These findings suggest there is no difference in postoperative complications between groups, including the need for revision surgeries when comparing groups with immediate or delayed intervention. Thus, treatment plans should be customized based on patient and provider preferences.