ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Classical flaps for perinasal defect reconstruction, such as forehead or nasolabial flaps, have some disadvantages involving limitations of the arc of rotation and two stages of surgery. However, a perforator-based flap is more versatile and allows freedom in flap design. We introduced our experience with reconstruction using a facial artery perforator-based propeller flap on the perinasal area. We describe the surgical differences between different defect subtypes. METHODS: Between December 2005 and August 2013, 10 patients underwent perinasal reconstruction in which a facial artery perforator-based flap was used. We divided the perinasal defects into types A and B, according to location. The operative results, including flap size, arc of rotation, complications, and characteristics of the perforator were evaluated by retrospective chart review and photographic evaluation. RESULTS: Eight patients were male and 2 patients were female. Their mean age was 61 years (range, 35-75 years). The size of the flap ranged from 1 cmx1.5 cm to 3 cmx6 cm. Eight patients healed uneventfully, but 2 patients presented with mild flap congestion. However, these 2 patients healed by conservative management without any additional surgery. All of the flaps survived completely with aesthetically pleasing results. CONCLUSIONS: The facial artery perforator-based flap allowed for versatile customized flaps, and the donor site scar was concealed using the natural nasolabial fold.
Subject(s)
Female , Humans , Male , Arteries , Cicatrix , Estrogens, Conjugated (USP) , Forehead , Freedom , General Surgery , Nasolabial Fold , Nose , Perforator Flap , Retrospective Studies , Surgical Flaps , Tissue DonorsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Although platelet-rich plasma (PRP) potentiate the wound healing activity of adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs), its effect cannot be sustained for a prolonged period of time due to short duration of action. This led us to design and produce platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), in an effort to develop a tool which lasts longer, and apply it on wound healing. METHODS: Two symmetrical skin defects were made on the back of seven nude mice. ADSCs were applied to each wound, combined with either PRP or PRF. The wound area was measured over 14 days. By day 16, the wound was harvested and histologic analysis was performed including counting of the blood vessel. RESULTS: The healing rate was more accelerated in PRP group in the first 5 days (p<0.05). However, PRF group surpassed PRP group after 6 days (p<0.05). The average number of blood vessels observed in the PRF group was 6.53 +/- 0.51, compared with 5.68 +/- 0.71 for the PRP group. CONCLUSION: PRF exerts a slow yet pervasive influence over the two-week course of the wound healing process. Thus, PRF is probably more beneficial for promoting the activity of ADSCs for a sustained period of time.