Biomechanical and biological advantages of retaining the silicone-induced capsule for cartilage graft survival in revision rhinoplasty.

To answer the increased demand for augmentation rhinoplasty, particularly in Asian demographics, a shift from autogenous materials to synthetic implants like silicone and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene has been witnessed. These materials present an increased risk of complications like infection, extrusion, capsular contracture, and dissatisfaction. This study focuses on a case of revision rhinoplasty in a 48-year-old patient with a previous silicone implant and propose an innovative approach in managing the implant capsule. The use of the existing capsule as a mechanical and biological support structure for the diced cartilage graft in dorsal reconstruction showcases a promising method to mitigate risks and improve outcomes in revision surgeries. The capsule around the silicone is biologically active and provides a good environment for the cartilage graft to survive and improve the healing process. This approach tends to minimize the dissection to avoid potential revision complications like skin necrosis, fibrotic tissue, and infections.

Postoperative Cosmetic Scores and Revision Rates After Nasal Mohs Reconstructive Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Few studies have examined the impact of preoperative and surgical factors on the change in cosmetic survey scores after nasal Mohs reconstruction using a subset of the 10-item Standardized Cosmesis and Health Nasal Outcomes Survey-Cosmesis (SCHNOS-C). We aim to determine preoperative and surgical factors that impact cosmetic outcomes following Mohs nasal reconstruction. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: Nasal Mohs reconstruction patients at a tertiary medical center. METHODS: All patients receiving Mohs reconstruction of any nasal subunit at a tertiary medical center were analyzed. Variables collected included demographic and Mohs defect/reconstruction characteristics. Primary outcomes were changes in cosmetic (SCHNOS-C) scores and revision rates. Multivariable analysis was used to identify independent predictors of cosmetic scores/revision. RESULTS: We included 296 patients for analysis. On multivariable logistic regression, factors contributing to better final cosmetic scores were receiving a skin/composite graft (odds ratio [OR]: 0.22, 95% confidence interval: 0.06-0.68, P = .014) compared to a local flaps. Women were more likely to have worsening cosmetic scores (OR: 2.27, 1.06-4.99, P = .037). Only initial cosmetic scores independently predicted receiving any revision (OR: 1.11, 1.03-1.20, P = .006). CONCLUSION: Average SCHNOS-C scores after nasal reconstruction of Mohs defects are low. Only worse patient reported SCHNOS-C scores predicted revision. It is important to understand preoperative and surgical factors that affect cosmetic outcomes to optimize patient counseling and reconstructive planning. Patient perception is a key factor in predicting revisions.

A prospective study of psychological adjustment during and after forehead flap nasal reconstruction.

The psychological effects of staged nasal reconstruction with a forehead flap were prospectively investigated. Thirty-three patients underwent nasal reconstruction with forehead flaps between March 2017 and July 2020. Three questionnaires were used to assess psychosocial functioning before surgery (time 1), 1 week after forehead flap transfer (time 2), 1 week after forehead flap division (time 3), and after refinement procedures (time 4). The patients were categorized into three groups according to the severity of nasal defects. Between- and within-group comparisons were conducted. All patients reported increased satisfaction with their appearance during nasal reconstruction. For most patients, levels of distress and social avoidance were highest before reconstruction (time 1). Both levels decreased as reconstruction advanced, and were significantly improved by times 3 and 4. The stage of reconstruction had a greater effect on these levels than did severity of nasal defect. Nasal reconstruction with forehead flap is beneficial physically and psychologically. Psychological evaluation before and after surgery facilitates patient-surgeon interactions and further enhances outcomes.

Paramedian Frontal Flap Reconstruction for Nasal Defect Following an Accidental Amputation.

This case report aims to present the successful reconstruction of a nasal defect in a 56-year-old male patient who suffered a partial nasal amputation due to a domestic accident involving a grinding wheel. The reconstruction was carried out using a paramedian frontal flap in a two-stage surgical process. Initially, the flap was designed and customized to match the dimensions of the defect, with a pedicle width of approximately 1.5 cm vertically. The flap was elevated in a distal-to-proximal manner, starting with subcutaneous dissection and progressing to periosteal dissection proximally. Weekly dressing changes were made using fatty gauze and fusidic acid ointment. Four weeks postoperatively, the flap pedicle was divided, and the brow was repositioned. At the six-month follow-up, the patient showed satisfactory clinical outcomes with no functional complaints and was very pleased with the aesthetic result. Paramedian frontal flap reconstruction is a dependable technique for addressing nasal defects following traumatic amputation, providing favorable functional and aesthetic results. This case highlights the importance of careful surgical planning and technique in achieving successful facial reconstruction.

Decision Making in Nasal Reconstruction: When to Use the Forehead Flap?

In this review, the paramedian forehead flap indications and uses are reviewed, specifically examining clinical situations where patient selection is important. In these settings, a preoperative discussion with a patient regarding surgical expectations and goals in the setting of their defect is paramount. The authors review the literature regarding the psychosocial aspects of major nasal reconstruction and review preoperative discussion points that are key to a well-informed patient and improved patient satisfaction through the nasal reconstructive process.

Nasal Reconstruction of Large Defects Without a Forehead Flap.

Defects over 2.0 to 2.5 cm may often require repair with a multistaged forehead flap. However, in some such defects, other options may be available. In this article, the author will review some of these options.

Implications of Malignancy, Radiation, and Timing of Major Nasal Reconstruction.

Owing to the complex, multilayered anatomy of the nose in the central face, major nasal reconstruction can pose a significant challenge for reconstructive surgeons. It is the responsibility of reconstructive surgeons to have an understanding of the most common cutaneous malignancies and excisional techniques that may lead to complex nasal defects. The purpose of this article is to discuss these malignancies, excisional techniques, and impacts of radiation on tissue that has implications for reconstructive surgeons.

Nasal Lining Reconstruction with Prelaminated Forehead Flap.

A successful nasal reconstruction relies heavily on a stable internal lining. Larger defects pose unique challenges for internal lining reconstruction as obtaining tissue of adequate size while maintaining airway patency is difficult. The prelamination technique uses a staged skin graft to the paramedian forehead flap prior to transfer. As such, a composite flap can be later transferred to reconstruct internal and external nasal defects concomitantly. This article reviews the current background, techniques, and clinical considerations in the use of the prelaminated forehead flap for nasal lining reconstruction in partial to total nasal defects.

Total Nasal Reconstruction: Advances in Free Tissue Transfer for Internal Lining and Structural Support.

Total nasal reconstruction is a complex challenge due to the need to establish new internal lining, internal structural support, and external skin covering that is both functional and esthetic. The medial femoral condyle corticoperiosteal free flap represents an innovative option for restoration internal structure and internal nasal lining. When used in conjunction with a paramedian forehead flap, acceptable results in both function and esthetics can be achieved.

Approach to Major Nasal Reconstruction: Benefits of Staged Surgery and Use of Technology.

This article reviews special considerations in complex nasal defects including treatment of adjacent subunit defects, timing of repair with radiation, reconstruction in patients with prior repairs or recurrent disease, and the role of prosthetics. The role of technological advances including virtual surgical planning, 3 dimensional printing, biocompatible materials, and tissue engineering is discussed.

Nuances in Forehead Flap Reconstruction for Large Nasal Defects.

The forehead flap is a time-tested and robust resurfacing flap used for nasal reconstruction. Owing to its excellent color and texture match, acceptable donor site morbidity, and robust and independent blood supply that can support both structural and internal lining grafts, this flap remains the workhorse flap for resurfacing large nasal defects. Various nuances of this technique relating to defect and template preparation, flap design, flap elevation, flap inset, donor site closure, and pedicle division are discussed in this article. These nuances are the guiding principles for improved outcomes using a forehead flap for the reconstruction of large nasal defects.

Reconstruction of Large Composite Defects Extending Beyond the Nose.

Nasal reconstruction remains one of the most challenging surgeries for facial plastic and reconstructive surgeons. The addition of defects extending beyond the nose adds a layer of complexity to an already technically demanding surgery. This article will focus on the management of composite defects extending beyond the boundaries of the nose. Surgeons need to have a variety of techniques at their disposal. These complex defects often require multiple local flaps, multiple stages, and, in select cases, free tissue transfer.

Management of Traumatic Nasal Avulsion Injuries.

Soft tissue injuries to the midface (and nose) are common causes for seeking trauma care. As trauma patients, observing advanced trauma life support protocols is warranted given the risk of concomitant injuries. Here, options for optimizing tissue preservation, microvascular replantation, non-microvascular tissue replacement, and wound stabilization are discussed. Included in this discussion are data-driven predictors for successful replantation as well as technique descriptions with anatomic references to guide surgeons in choosing optimal donor vessels. In both partial and complete avulsion injuries, venous congestion is common. Several postoperative wound care protocols to maximize tissue perfusion and long-term viability are discussed.

Revision Nasal Reconstruction After Previous Forehead Flap.

Reconstructing the nose poses considerable challenges, even for the most skilled surgeons. Significant nasal reconstructions often require later revisions to address persistent issues in both form and function, and it is crucial to discuss this possibility with the patient before embarking on the reconstructive process. Minor revisions can often be managed by making direct incisions between nasal subunits, coupled with soft tissue sculpting or the use of structural grafts for augmentation. When minor adjustments prove insufficient, the initial reconstruction may need to be entirely revised with a second forehead flap.

Prevention and Management of Complications in Nasal Reconstruction.

Nasal reconstruction is a challenging practice with the potential for complications. Surgeons can prevent complications through preoperative optimization of patient factors, refinement of intraoperative surgical techniques, and postoperative surgical and nonsurgical wound care. Preoperatively, optimization of modifiable and recognition of nonmodifiable risk factors is paramount. Intraoperatively, meticulous flap design and surgical technique promote healing. In the postoperative setting, attentive wound care, adjuvant therapies, and close follow-up for consideration of additional procedures enhance outcomes. By anticipating potential complications across perioperative settings, surgeons can prevent common complications in nasal reconstruction and more effectively manage those complications that arise.

Prosthetic Nasal Reconstruction.

Prosthetic nasal reconstruction provides a restorative option for patients with nasal defects, and these can be retained with a variety of methods including adhesives and implants. These prostheses can significantly improve appearance, self-esteem, and quality of life for patients and they restore many functions of the external nose. Traditional fabrication methods are often used by the skilled professionals who make these custom prostheses, but digital technology is improving the workflow for design and fabrication of silicone nasal prostheses. Nasal prosthetic reconstruction requires multidisciplinary coordination between surgeons, maxillofacial prosthodontists, anaplastologists, and other members of the healthcare team. Prosthetic treatment can be considered as an alternative to, or an addition to treatment with surgical reconstruction.

Repair of Asian nasal subunit defects using nasolabial perforator flaps: A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The application of nasolabial perforator flap for nasal reconstruction has been reported previously with satisfactory outcomes, but the outcomes and risk factors of postoperative adverse events have been unclear to plastic surgeons. AIMS: To statistically analyze the effectiveness of the nasolabial perforator flap in nasal reconstruction and the risk factor of postoperative complications and re-operation. PATIENTS/METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated 58 Chinese patients who underwent nasal reconstruction with the nasolabial perforator flap from 2009 to 2021. The esthetic and blood supply outcomes were measured by plastic surgeons on a 5-point Likert scale. Binary logistic regression was used to determine the risk factors associated with postoperative complications and re-operation. RESULTS: The mean age of the cohort was 66.4 ± 2.0 years. The defect size ranged from 6.5 × 5.5 mm2 to 40 × 70 mm2 , and 48.3% of defects covered more than one nasal subunit. Venous congestion occurred in 4.9% of flaps, and the immediate overall postoperative score was 7.72/10. More than one nasal subunit of involvement was the risk factor associated with re-operation (p = 0.004), but no risk factor was associated with complications. CONCLUSIONS: The nasolabial perforator flap is reliable for nasal reconstruction with good esthetic outcomes and fewer complications. However, a large number of involved subunits may lead to multiple surgeries for flap trimming in easterners.