Comparison of the Modified Version of DRAF III to the Conventional DRAF III: A 5 Year Study
- 19 Downloads
A modification is made to the conventional way of doing Draf III by completely avoiding burrs by using only gouges and punches to reduce the postoperative narrowing followed by local instillation of budesonide solution. The results are compared. The comparison was made in terms of surgical duration, frontal ostium size, and recurrence of pathology. This is a prospective non-randomised comparative study in a private practice setting. 25 patients (15 males and 10 females) who underwent Draf III surgery between April 2012 and March 2017 were included in the study. Among them, 14 patients were assigned surgery only with punches and gouges. All the patients were given budesonide nasal instillation postoperatively. Outcomes measured included surgical duration, frontal neo-ostium size and, recurrence of pathology. They were followed up for a period of 14 months. The Student’s independent t test and χ2 test for independence of attributes were used for statistical analysis. The mean surgical duration for modified Draf III was significantly shorter than conventional Draf III (p value < 0.01). The frontal ostium remained patent in modified Draf III than the Draf III using burrs with a statistical significance (p value < 0.01). The number of cases reporting the absence of recurrence was significantly higher (p value < 0.001) in modified Draf III. Modified Draf III technique, which completely avoids the burr, takes only lesser surgical duration, keeps the frontal ostium patent and drastically reduces recurrence of pathology. Combining postoperative budesonide instillation after modified Draf III helps in achieving promising results.
KeywordsDraf III Punches Gouges Modified Lothrop Restenosis Fungal sinusitis Polyposis
The authors wish to acknowledge Mr. Aman Paul George, Medical Student, for secretarial assistance and Mr. Iyer for the statistical analysis.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
Research Involving Human Participants and/or Animals
This study have been approved by the appropriate institutional and/or national research ethics committee and have been performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 10.AlQahtani A, Bignami M, Terranova P, Digilio E, Basilico F, Abdulrahman S, Castelnuovo P (2014) Newly designed double-vascularized nasoseptal flap to prevent restenosis after endoscopic modified Lothrop procedure (Draf III): laboratory investigation. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 271(11):2951–2955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Jaksha AF, Weitzel EK, Laury AM (2016) Recent advances in the surgical management of rhinosinusitis. Research 5:F1000 Faculty Rev 2377. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.9163.1