A Systematic Review and Overview of Flap Reconstructive Techniques for Nasal Skin Defects.

Background: Reconstruction of nasal skin defects can be challenging due to limited skin laxity and underlying cartilage and, therefore, often require a complex repair. The aim of this review is to systematically analyze the literature on nasal skin reconstructions with specific detail to flap reconstructions. Methods: A systematic literature review of nasal skin reconstruction was performed and focused on flap reconstructions. Flap reconstructions were stratified based on defect size, nasal subunit, and reconstruction type. Complication rates (CRs) and patient outcomes were also assessed. Results: A total of 176 articles (11,370 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 59 articles showed various flap techniques. For defects ≤1.5 cm, every subunit had four to six options except the alar rim, which showed one option. Rotation-advancement flaps were mostly used for the nasal tip and sidewall, whereas bilobed flaps were used more for the ala and dorsum. Defects >1.5 cm were most commonly reconstructed with the forehead flap. The mean CR of flap reconstructions was 13.8%. Only 8 of the 176 articles (4.5%) reported patient satisfaction using a standardized questionnaire. Conclusion: This review shows various flap reconstruction options with their corresponding CR that will help guide the surgeon in choosing reconstructive options for different nasal skin defects.

To see or not to see: Impact of viewing facial skin cancer defects prior to reconstruction.

Patient expectations of the scar after Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) are often not realistic, leading to subsequent psychosocial sequelae such as anxiety, depression, and avoidance of social situations. When patient expectations are not met, this may also contribute to a decrease in patient satisfaction after surgery. Therefore, altering expectation levels may change patient satisfaction and psychosocial distress levels after surgery. To assess whether patient satisfaction improves in patients after MMS when patients view the surgical defect prior to reconstruction. Patients undergoing facial MMS between December 2017 and September 2019 were included. Patients received or did not receive a mirror after MMS to view the surgical defect before closing the defect. Patients were asked to complete the Dutch FACE-Q Skin Cancer before, one-week, three-months, and one-year after MMS. A total of 113 patients where included. One-hundred-eight (95.6%), 113 (100%), and 93 (82.3%) questionnaires were completed, one-week, three-months, and one-year follow-up, respectively. Satisfaction with facial appearance and appraisal of scars significantly improved over time for all patients, no such improvement was seen for appearance-related distress. Female patients who looked in the mirror had higher satisfaction with facial appearance than female patients who did not look in the mirror. Also, lower appearance-related distress scores were seen in patients who looked in the mirror prior to a flap reconstruction. Showing the defect in the mirror prior to the reconstruction may result in higher patient satisfaction in female patients and patients before undergoing a flap reconstruction.