ABSTRACT
Background@#Although the zygomatic arch is an important structure determining facial prominence and width, no consensus exists regarding the classification of isolated zygomatic arch fractures, and the literature on this topic is scarce. To date, five papers have subdivided zygomatic arch fractures; however, only one of those proposed classifications includes the injury vector, although the injury vector is one of the most important factors to consider in fracture cases. Furthermore, the only classification that does include the injury vector is too complicated to be suitable for daily practice. In addition, the existing classifications are clinically limited because they do not consider greenstick fractures, nondisplaced fractures, or coronoid impingement. In the present study, we present a rearrangement of the previously published classifications and propose a modified classification of isolated zygomatic arch fractures that maximizes the advantages and overcomes the disadvantages of previous classification systems. @*Methods@#The classification criteria for isolated zygomatic arch fractures described in five previous studies were analyzed, rearranged, and supplemented to generate a modified classification. The medical records, radiographs, and facial bone computed tomography findings of 134 patients with isolated zygomatic arch fractures who visited our hospital between January 2010 and December 2019 were also retrospectively analyzed. @*Results@#We analyzed major classification criteria (displacement, the force vector of the injury, V-shaped fracture, and coronoid impingement) for isolated zygomatic arch fracture from the five previous studies and developed a modified classification by subdividing zygomatic arch fractures. We applied the modified classification to cases of isolated zygomatic arch fracture at our hospital. The surgery rate and injury severity differed significantly from fracture types I to VI. @*Conclusion@#Using our modified classification, we could determine that both the injury force and the injury vector meaningfully influenced the surgery rate and the severity of the injuries.
ABSTRACT
Background@#The annual incidence of skin cancer has been increasing, and surgical ablation is presently the treatment of choice for skin cancer. However, it leaves soft tissue defects that require reconstruction. The methods for reconstruction include locoregional flaps (LRFs) and full-thickness skin grafts (FTSGs). We compared these two surgical methods for reconstruction of defects in the nose, which is prominently visible and the most common site of facial skin cancer, and assessed the cosmetic results by evaluating the scars. @*Methods@#This retrospective study was conducted between July 2012 and January 2021. Patients were evaluated for scars after at least 6 months of follow-up. Patients were divided into LRF and FTSG groups. The scars were evaluated using the Vancouver Scar Scale. @*Results@#In total, 27 patients were included in this study. Their mean age was 66.8 years. Eighteen patients underwent LRF, and nine patients underwent FTSG. The average defect size was 1.55 cm² in the LRF group, and 1.38 cm² in the FTSG group. The average scar score was 1.44 points in the LRF group and 3.67 points in the FTSG group. The LRF group showed significantly lower total scores than the FTSG group. @*Conclusions@#Although LRFs and FTSGs are useful reconstructive methods for nasal soft tissue defects, this study showed that LRFs are superior to FTSGs in terms of aesthetic results.
