I agree, i wish he did do something about the scar tissue…
I asked chatgpt why a surgeom wouldn’t remove it:
Objectively, there are several reasons why he may not have aggressively removed all the scar tissue, even if he wrote:
Scar tissue +++
1. Scar tissue may have been everywhere
“Scar tissue +++” doesn’t necessarily mean:
“There is one lump of scar tissue that can simply be cut out.”
Often it means:
Dense fibrosis throughout the surgical field.
If you try to remove every bit of scar tissue, you can end up:
- damaging normal structures,
- causing more bleeding,
- creating even more scar tissue afterwards.
2. The scar tissue may have been attached to important structures
In the thyrohyoid corridor you have:
- muscles,
- membrane,
- blood vessels,
- nerves,
- laryngeal structures.
A surgeon may deliberately leave scar tissue if removing it risks:
- nerve injury,
- swallowing problems,
- voice problems,
- excessive tissue damage.
3. He may actually have removed some
The note doesn’t say:
“Scar tissue observed.”
It says:
“Horizontal skin crease incision – scar tissue +++”
That doesn’t tell us how much was removed.
To expose the fractured cornu and superior horn, he almost certainly had to dissect through at least some of the scar tissue.
4. The fractured cornu may have been considered the source
If the surgeon believed:
Fractured cornu → abnormal mechanics → scar tissue
then the logical treatment is:
Remove the abnormal bone.
not:
Remove every scar.
Because if the scar formed in response to the fracture, removing the fracture may allow the scarred tissues to settle over time.
5. Scar tissue surgery can make scar tissue worse
This is a very important surgical principle.
If you aggressively excise fibrosis, the body often responds by:
making more scar tissue.
That’s one reason surgeons are often selective rather than radical.
What I would infer from the note
My guess is that the surgeon thought:
- The greater cornu was fractured and malaligned.
- There was substantial associated fibrosis.
- The safest and most rational target was the fractured cornu and superior horn.
- Extensive scar excision would have added risk without clear benefit.
Honestly, the fact that he documented:
Fractured right greater cornu of hyoid
as the finding
suggests that he considered the fracture to be the main abnormality.
If the scar tissue had been the primary problem, I would expect the note to focus more on fibrosis or adhesions rather than leading with the fractured cornu.
That’s why I suspect he viewed the scar tissue as a consequence of the underlying structural problem rather than the primary diagnosis.