Archives of Plastic Surgery

Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (대한성형외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Reconstruction of Various Perinasal Defects Using Facial Artery Perforator-Based Nasolabial Island Flaps

  • Yoon, Tae Ho (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Institute for Human Tissue Restoration, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Yun, In Sik (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Institute for Human Tissue Restoration, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Rha, Dong Kyun (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Institute for Human Tissue Restoration, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Won Jai (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Institute for Human Tissue Restoration, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2013.05.27
  • Accepted : 2013.07.26
  • Published : 2013.11.15
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

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 $1cm{\times}1.5cm$ to $3cm{\times}6cm$. 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.

Keywords

References

  1. Menick FJ, Salibian A. Microvascular repair of heminasal, subtotal, and total nasal defects with a folded radial forearm flap and a full-thickness forehead flap. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011;127:637-51. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181fed686
  2. Menick FJ. Nasal reconstruction with a forehead flap. Clin Plast Surg 2009;36:443-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cps.2009.02.015
  3. Cameron RR, Latham WD, Dowling JA. Reconstructions of the nose and upper lip with nasolabial flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg 1973;52:145-50. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-197308000-00007
  4. Chu EA, Byrne PJ. Local flaps I: bilobed, rhombic, and cervicofacial. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2009;17:349-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsc.2009.05.003
  5. Kwon KH, Lee DG, Koo SH, et al. Usefulness of v-y advancement flap for defects after skin tumor excision. Arch Plast Surg 2012;39:619-25. https://doi.org/10.5999/aps.2012.39.6.619
  6. Krijgh DD, Mureau MA. Aesthetic and functional outcome following perioral defect reconstruction using the facial artery perforator flap. J Reconstr Microsurg 2012;28:529-38. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1315773
  7. Kim SW, Kim YH, Kim JT. Angular artery perforator-based transposition flap for the reconstruction of midface defect. Int J Dermatol 2012;51:1366-70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-4632.2012.05516.x
  8. Hofer SO, Posch NA, Smit X. The facial artery perforator flap for reconstruction of perioral defects. Plast Reconstr Surg 2005;115:996-1003. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.PRS.0000154208.67390.5C
  9. D'Arpa S, Cordova A, Pirrello R, et al. Free style facial artery perforator flap for one stage reconstruction of the nasal ala. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2009;62:36-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2008.06.057
  10. Sohn WI, Choi JY, Seo BF, et al. Reconstruction of nasal ala with nasolabial perforator flap after cancer removal. Head Neck Oncol 2012;4:83.
  11. Demirseren ME, Afandiyev K, Ceran C. Reconstruction of the perioral and perinasal defects with facial artery perforator flaps. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2009;62:1616-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2008.07.037
  12. Karsidag S, Ozcan A, Sumer O, et al. Single-stage ala nasi reconstruction: lateral nasal artery perforator flap. J Craniofac Surg 2010;21:1887-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e3181f4af27
  13. Feinendegen DL, Langer M, Gault D. A combined V-Y advancement-turnover flap for simultaneous perialar and alar reconstruction. Br J Plast Surg 2000;53:248-50. https://doi.org/10.1054/bjps.2000.3326
  14. Koshima I, Soeda S. Inferior epigastric artery skin flaps without rectus abdominis muscle. Br J Plast Surg 1989;42:645-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-1226(89)90075-1
  15. Blondeel PN, Van Landuyt KH, Monstrey SJ, et al. The "Gent" consensus on perforator flap terminology: preliminary definitions. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003;112:1378-83. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.PRS.0000081071.83805.B6
  16. Kim JT. New nomenclature concept of perforator flap. Br J Plast Surg 2005;58:431-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2004.12.009
  17. Pignatti M, Ogawa R, Hallock GG, et al. The "Tokyo" consensus on propeller flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011;127:716-22. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181fed6b2
  18. Houseman ND, Taylor GI, Pan WR. The angiosomes of the head and neck: anatomic study and clinical applications. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000;105:2287-313. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-200006000-00001
  19. Nakajima H, Imanishi N, Aiso S. Facial artery in the upper lip and nose: anatomy and a clinical application. Plast Reconstr Surg 2002;109:855-61. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-200203000-00003
  20. Niranjan NS. An anatomical study of the facial artery. Ann Plast Surg 1988;21:14-22. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000637-198807000-00003
  21. Ng ZY, Fogg QA, Shoaib T. Where to find facial artery perforators: a reference point. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2010;63:2046-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2010.01.002
  22. Qassemyar Q, Havet E, Sinna R. Vascular basis of the facial artery perforator flap: analysis of 101 perforator territories. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012;129:421-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e31822b6771

Cited by

  1. Treatment Algorithm of Complications after Filler Injection: Based on Wound Healing Process vol.29, pp.suppl3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2014.29.s3.s176
  2. Gene Therapy Using Hepatocyte Growth Factor Expressing Adenovirus Improves Skin Flap Survival in a Rat Model vol.29, pp.suppl3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2014.29.s3.s228
  3. Perforator Flap versus Conventional Flap vol.30, pp.5, 2013, https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2015.30.5.514
  4. The place of nasolabial flap in orofacial reconstruction: A review vol.12, pp.None, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2016.11.008
  5. Nasolabial propeller perforator flap: Anatomical study and case series vol.117, pp.5, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.25013
  6. Reconstruction of midface defects using local flaps : An algorithm for appropriate flap choice vol.98, pp.46, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000018021