{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01940755873340143, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007150153217568948, 'mean_word_length': 4.975609756097561, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[A comparison of the changes of the nasal deformities after cleft lip repair between rotation advancement and triangular flap repair].

126 patients with the secondary nasal deformities of cleft lip were chosen at random, whose primary correction of cleft lip were performed by the same surgon. Of them, 68 patients were treated by triangular flap method, other 58 by rotation advancement method. On their photographs, two methods were compared by measurement of the distance between alar bases and median saggittal plane, the width of nostril floor, the height of the columella, the sizes of nostrils on both sides, and tilt of columella. The nasal deformities were improved in the rotation advancement group, but this method trend to result in a small nostril to make correction of secondary nasal deformities more difficult. On the other hand, the nasal defects were little improved in triangular flap group, whereas there were much less tendency to result in a small nostril.