Revisiting Nasal Reconstruction After Mohs Surgery: A Simplified Approach Based on the Liberal Application of Local Flaps.

INTRODUCTION: Nasal reconstruction after oncologic resection often constitutes a technically demanding task. The aim of this study was to investigate our experience with nasal reconstruction after Mohs micrographic surgery using the following 3 well-established, versatile, and reliable techniques: the bilobed flap, nasolabial flap, and forehead flap. METHODS: A single-surgeon retrospective chart review of all patients undergone a bilobed, nasolabial, or forehead flap for nasal reconstruction after Mohs micrographic surgery from 2003 to 2017 was conducted. Data collected for analysis included demographics and defect characteristics. Revisions and complications were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 83 patients were included in the study; 52 patients underwent bilobed, 17 patients nasolabial, and 14 patients forehead flaps. All defects involved the middle and lower nasal zones. There was a significant difference in the defect size between the 3 groups (P < 0.001). The mean diameters were as follows: 1.37 cm for the bilobed, 2.22 cm for the nasolabial, and 3.46 cm for the forehead flap groups. Liberal utilization of the bilobed and nasolabial flaps achieved reconstruction of defects larger than typically described in the literature. Reconstruction of all defects, including support for successful restoration of mucosal lining and cartilage when indicated, was achieved. An algorithm dealing with defects larger than 0.5 cm in the middle and distal nasal zones was devised. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the liberal application of the 3 flaps was described based on an individualized treatment approach. The algorithm provides a simplified approach for larger nasal defects in the middle and lower thirds.

A Comparison of Elliptical Mastectomy to Inverted-T Pattern Mastectomy in Two-Stage Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Patients with large or ptotic breasts undergoing mastectomy followed by tissue expander/implant-based reconstruction may benefit from a Wise (inverted-T) pattern reduction mammaplasty incision compared with the traditional horizontal elliptical incision. The authors compared these two groups of patients with regard to complication rates and outcomes. METHODS: Sixty-nine patients (117 breasts) were identified who underwent Wise pattern mastectomy and two-stage reconstruction. A control group of 89 patients (136 breasts) who underwent reconstruction after horizontal elliptical mastectomy were selected over the same period. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and complication rates were recorded and analyzed statistically. RESULTS: Patient demographics (age, body mass index, diabetes, smoking, and irradiation history) and clinical characteristics (laterality, expander size and fill volume, and time to expansion) were similar, with the exception of body mass index (control, 26.7 kg/m; inverted-T, 28.7 kg/m; p = 0.04) and mean intraoperative fill volume (control, 158.7 cc; inverted-T, 196.9 cc; p = 0.02). Of all complications (infection, seroma, flap necrosis, expander loss, and salvage), only the rate of mastectomy flap necrosis was significantly greater (p = 0.002) in patients undergoing inverted-T mastectomy (25.6 percent versus 11.0 percent). This difference did not result in a significantly higher rate of expander loss or need for salvage surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The inverted-T mastectomy approach can be performed safely with acceptable complication rates. When compared with an internal control group, complication rates were similar, with the exception of mastectomy flap necrosis. Despite a higher rate of flap necrosis, 91 percent of inverted-T patients successfully completed the expansion process. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.