Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_816_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
X
- •Foreword
- •Contents
- •Contributors
- •Flap Design/Surgical Technique/Ducic Pearls
- •Advancement Flap
- •Rotational Flap
- •Transposition Flap
- •1: Local Flaps
- •Introduction
- •Anatomy
- •Indications/Contraindications
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Instrument/Equipment Set
- •Postoperative Management
- •References
- •2: Facial Regional Flaps
- •Introduction
- •Anatomy
- •Indications/Contraindications
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Instrument/Equipment Set
- •Flap Design/Surgical Technique
- •Paramedian Forehead Flap
- •Melolabial Flap
- •Postoperative Management
- •References
- •3: Nasal Reconstruction
- •Introduction
- •Anatomy
- •Indications
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Instrument/Equipment Set
- •Postoperative Management
- •References
- •Implant Materials
- •Prosthetic Materials
- •Prosthetic Placement
- •Site-Specific Considerations
- •Auricular Reconstruction
- •Auricular Alloplastic Implant Reconstruction
- •Auricular Prosthetics
- •Nasal Reconstruction
- •Maxillary/Midface Reconstruction
- •Orbital Reconstruction
- •Ocular Implants
- •Orbital Prosthesis
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Anatomy
- •Musculature
- •Innervation
- •Arterial Supply
- •Reconstructive Ladder Approach
- •Perioperative Care
- •Intraoperative Setup
- •Postoperative Care
- •Partial Thickness Reconstruction
- •Partial Thickness Defects: Vermillion
- •Secondary Intention
- •Vermillion Advancement Flap
- •FAMM Flap [17]
- •Partial Thickness Defects: Cutaneous
- •Primary Closure
- •Skin Grafting
- •Local Flaps
- •Ergotrid Flap
- •Melolabial Flap
- •Full Thickness Reconstruction
- •Special Considerations: Lower Lip
- •Small Defects
- •Larger Defects
- •Special Considerations: Upper Lip
- •Local Flaps
- •Bilateral Lip Advancement Flap
- •Stair-Step Advancement Flap
- •Alar Crescent Flap
- •Karapandzic Flap
- •Gillies Fan Flap
- •Bernard–von Burow (and Webster Modification)
- •Local Flaps: Cross-Lip Flaps
- •Abbe Flap
- •Extended Abbe Flap
- •Estlander Flap
- •Free Tissue Transfer
- •Radial Forearm Free Flap
- •Managing Microstomia
- •Commissuroplasty
- •Summary
- •References
- •6: Pectoralis Major Flap
- •Introduction
- •Anatomy
- •Neurovascular Supply
- •Advantages
- •Flap Usage
- •Case Examples
- •Complications
- •Disadvantages
- •Preoperative Evaluation
- •Flap Harvest
- •Important Considerations
- •References
- •7: Anterolateral Thigh Free Flap
- •Introduction/History
- •Anatomy
- •Arterial Anatomy
- •Venous Anatomy
- •Neural Anatomy
- •Indications/Contraindications
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Instrument/Equipment Set
- •Flap Design/Surgical Technique/Ducic Pearls
- •Postoperative Management
- •References
- •8: Free Rectus Flap Reconstruction
- •Introduction
- •Operative Steps
- •Preoperative Considerations
- •Flap Features
- •Pearls
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •9: The Radial Forearm Free Flap
- •Introduction/History
- •Anatomy
- •Indication/Contraindications
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Instrumentation
- •Donor Site Closure
- •Postoperative Management
- •Pearls/Pitfalls
- •References
- •10: Cervicodeltopectoral Flap
- •Introduction
- •Anatomy
- •Neurovascular Supply
- •Cervicodeltopectoral Flap Advantages
- •Cervicodeltopectoral Flap Disadvantages
- •Preoperative Evaluation
- •Flap Harvest
- •Important Considerations
- •Important Dimensions
- •Skin Island Dimensions
- •Artery
- •Vein
- •Nerve
- •Cervicodeltopectoral Flap Usage
- •Complications
- •Case Example
- •References
- •Introduction
- •History
- •Relevant Anatomy [and Nomenclature]
- •The Trapezius Muscle
- •Regional Anatomy
- •Blood Supply: Nomenclature
- •Flap Nomenclature
- •Operative Technique
- •Preoperative Evaluation
- •Positioning
- •Harvest Technique
- •Upper Trapezius Flap
- •Lower Trapezius Flap
- •Trapezius Free Flap
- •Donor-Site Morbidity
- •Limitations
- •Indications
- •Complications
- •Conclusions
- •References
- •12: Supraclavicular Flap
- •Introduction
- •Anatomy
- •Indications
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Instrumentation
- •Surgical Technique
- •Postoperative Management
- •References
- •13: The Free Fibula Flap
- •Introduction/History
- •Anatomy
- •Indication/Contraindications
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Instrumentation
- •Donor Site Closure
- •Postoperative Management
- •Pearls/Pitfalls
- •References
- •History
- •Vascular System
- •Muscle
- •Bone
- •Fasciocutaneous Flaps
- •Operative Technique
- •Preoperative Evaluation
- •Flap Harvest
- •Scapular Tip Flap
- •Chimeric Flaps
- •Fascial Flaps
- •Virtual Surgical Planning
- •Midface Reconstruction
- •Mandible Reconstruction
- •Dental Implants
- •Limitations
- •Conclusions
- •References
- •15: The Osteocutaneous Radial Forearm Free Flap
- •Introduction
- •Historical
- •Anatomy
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Clinical Exam
- •Imaging
- •Instrumentation/Requirements
- •Design/Technique
- •Patient Positioning
- •Radius Osteotomy
- •Proximal Donor Vessel Preparation
- •Nonvascularized Donor Site Reconstruction Techniques
- •Vascularized Soft Tissue Donor Site Reconstruction Techniques
- •Postop Management
- •Complications
- •Outcomes
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Iliac Crest Nonvascularized Bone Harvest
- •Preoperative Considerations
- •Wound Closure
- •Postoperative Considerations
- •Pearls
- •Discussion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Buccal Branch Identification
- •Masseteric Nerve Identification
- •Nerve Transfer
- •Pearls
- •References
- •18: Outpatient Periocular Reanimation
- •Introduction
- •Pretarsal Upper Eyelid Weight Placement
- •Lateral Tarsal Strip Canthoplasty
- •Pearls
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Fascia Lata Harvest
- •Static Facial Suspension
- •Pearls
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Recipient Site Preparation
- •Sural Nerve Harvest
- •Cross-Face Nerve Grafting
- •Sterno-omohyoid Muscle Flap Harvest
- •Sterno-omohyoid Muscle Flap Inset
- •Pearls
- •References
- •21: Unilateral Cleft Lip Repair
- •Introduction
- •Anatomy
- •Indications
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Instruments/Equipment
- •Surgical Technique
- •Marking
- •Surgical Steps/Incisions
- •Closing/Suturing
- •Postoperative Management
- •References
- •22: Cleft Palate Repair
- •Introduction
- •Anatomy
- •Indications/Contraindications
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Instruments/Equipment Set
- •Flap Design/Surgical Technique/Pearls
- •Von Langenbeck Palatoplasty
- •Two-Flap Palatoplasty (Bardach)
- •Special Considerations
- •Postoperative Management
- •Outcomes
- •Oronasal Fistula Rate
- •Velopharyngeal Dysfunction
- •Facial Growth
- •Eustachian Tube Dysfunction
- •References
- •23: Mandible Trauma Reconstruction
- •Introduction
- •Anatomy
- •Indications/Contraindications
- •Body
- •Condylar
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Instrument/Equipment
- •Surgical Technique
- •Postoperative Management
- •References
- •24: Midface Trauma Reconstruction
- •Introduction/History
- •Anatomy
- •Classification
- •Clinical Assessment
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Instrument/Equipment Setup
- •Site-Specific Surgical Techniques
- •Zygomaticomaxillary Complex Fractures
- •Le Fort II Fractures
- •Pan Facial Fractures
- •Pediatric Midface Fracture Management
- •Complications
- •References
- •25: Frontal Sinus Reconstruction
- •Introduction
- •Anatomy
- •Anterior Table
- •Posterior Table
- •Frontal Sinus Outflow Tract
- •Grafts
- •Autologous Bone Grafts
- •Alloplastic Implants
- •Titanium Mesh
- •Medpor (Porous Polyethylene)
- •PEEK (Polyether-Ether Ketone)
- •Hydroxyapatite Cement
- •Methyl Methacrylate
- •Pericranial Flap
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •26: Orbital Trauma Reconstruction
- •Intro/History
- •Anatomy
- •Indications/Contraindications
- •Preop Planning/Workup
- •Instruments/Setup
- •Surgical Technique/Pearls (Treatment)
- •Postop Management
- •References
- •27: Endoscopic Skull Base Reconstruction
- •Introduction
- •Preoperative Planning
- •Surgical Technique: Endoscopic Skull Base Reconstruction
- •Grade 0
- •Grade 1
- •Grade 2
- •Grade 3
- •Intranasal Vascularized Pedicled Flaps
- •Nasoseptal Flap (Hadad-Bassagasteguy Flap)
- •Posterior Pedicle Inferior Turbinate Flap
- •Posterior Pedicle Middle Turbinate Flap
- •Regional Vascularized Extranasal Flaps
- •Endoscopic-Assisted Pericranial Flap
- •Temporoparietal Fascial Flap
- •Postoperative Care
- •References
- •28: Open (Anterior) Skull Base Repair
- •Introduction
- •Anatomy
- •Planning
- •Anatomic Factors
- •Patient Factors
- •Surgical Technique
- •Free Tissue Transfer
- •Temporoparietal Fascia Flap (TPFF)
- •Temporalis Muscle Flap
- •Postoperative Management
- •References
- •Index

3 Nasal Reconstruction
33
Dorsum
Sidewall
Tip
subunit
Soft triangleAlar
Columella
Alar subunit
Fig. 3.1 Nasal subunits. Paired nasal sidewalls, soft tissue triangles, and alars. Midline dorsum,
tip, and columellar subunits
Soft triangle
the supercial musculoaponeurotic layers, and the thickness of these layers varies
signicantly in different areas of the nose and between patients. The thickness of the
soft tissue envelope and the defect are important variables when choosing a reconstructive option. The soft tissue envelope is typically thickest in the upper third,
thinnest in the middle third over the rhinion, and then quite variable in the lower
third [19]. While the alar subunitdoes not have any cartilaginous structure, it does
contain the tela subcutanea cutis, which provides structure to the alar lobule [20].
The osseocartilaginous vault consists of the nasal bones, frontal process of maxilla,
septum, upper lateral cartilages, and lower lateral cartilages. At the keystone area,
the upper lateral cartilages pass under the nasal bonesto meet the dorsal septum
where it transitions to the perpendicular plate of the ethmoid.At the scroll area, the
lower lateral and upper lateral cartilages connect via the horizontal scroll ligament
in a variable fashion [21]. The internal lining of the nose consists largely of mucoperichondrium and mucoperiosteum, with skin lining the nasal vestibule.

34
A. Namin and D. Chan
Indications
Most nasal defects encountered in clinical practice will be limited to external defects
with an intact underlying osseocartilaginous vault and nasal lining. These external
defects are amenable to a variety of options along the reconstructive ladder including primary closure, secondary intention healing, skin grafts, local aps, and
regional aps. So long as underlying perichondrium or periosteum is present, secondary intention healing is always an option. Secondary intention healing serves as
a better option on at or concave surfaces of the upper 2/3 of the nose [22]. Due to
the inelasticity of the soft tissue envelope over the nose, primary closure is not a
frequently utilized option in nasal reconstruction but can be a good option for
defects of the upper 2/3 of the nose measuring 5–10mm in diameter. If the underlying perichondrium or periosteum is intact, skin grafts are an option for most nasal
defects. Even large defects involving the upper, middle, and lower thirds of the nose
can be grafted (Figs.3.2 and 3.3). When a skin graft is being contemplated for nasal
reconstruction, the patient’s remaining nasal skin should be assessed, and patient
desires should be understood. The obvious advantages of skin grafts are minimal
donor site morbidity and avoidance of staged procedures, with the disadvantages
being higher risk for color mismatch and contour irregularities. With that being said,
Fig. 3.2 Nasal defect
involving nasal sidewall, a
small portion of the alar,
cheek, and lower eyelid

3 Nasal Reconstruction
Fig. 3.3 Planned
reconstruction with
cervicofacial advancement
ap for the cheek and
lower eyelid defect and
split thickness skin graft
for the nasal sidewall
defect
Fig. 3.4 Immediate
postoperative result
demonstrating
cervicofacial advancement
ap inset and split
thickness skin graft
35
excellent cosmetic results can be obtained when skin grafts are utilized in appropriately selected candidates (Figs.3.4 and 3.5). Common skin graft donor sites for
nasal reconstruction are the forehead, preauricular region, and supraclavicular
region [22, 23]. Small defects (<1cm) along the columella, soft tissue triangle, and
alar margin pose unique challenges. While they are small defects, they are often
times full thickness and particularly prone to contraction and distortion. Therefore,
structural grafting and staged regional aps are often utilized to obtain the best
result. However, an alternative for small defects (<1cm) along the columella, soft
tissue triangle, and alar margin is acomposite graft taken from the root of the helix
or conchal bowl [23]. Composite grafts have high metabolic demands and are therefore more prone to failurethan skin grafts [23]. Ideal defects for compositive grafts
would be less than 1cm in size in a healthy patient less than 65years of age [23].
Postoperatively, a steroid taper should be prescribed, and icing should be applied in
order to help decrease the metabolic demands of the graft [23].
Defects of the middle and upper thirds of the nose measuring 1.0–1.5cm are well
suited for transposition aps. Once these defects are larger than 1cm, primary closure
typically is less than idealas it requires signicant tension and possible structural

36
Fig. 3.5 Four-month
postoperative result
A. Namin and D. Chan
deformation to be achieved. Skin grafting and healing by secondary intention are
acceptable considerations fordefects measuring 1.0–1.5cm of the upper and middle
thirds. The nasal skin of the lower third is the least mobile, so extensive undermining
is required if defects in this area are to be reconstructed with local tissue rearrangement. The bilobe ap is classically described as an option for nasal defects measuring
up to 1.5cm in the lower third of the nose but not extending into the ala or within
0.5cm of the nostril margin [23]. The V-Y advancement ap is an option for defects
<1.5cm in the supra alar groove [24]. The dorsal nasal ap is a good single-stage
reconstruction for defects of the middle third measuring up to 2.5cm in diameter [25].
The advantage of this ap is that it is only one stage and can reconstruct fairly large
defects.The primary disadvantage of the dorsal nasal apis that the incision lines
typically cross nasal subunits making scars morenoticeable postoperatively. It also
carries the possibility of increased tip rotation, which may be welcomed by older
patients. The paramedian forehead ap will often result in the best cosmetic outcome
for larger defects of the lower 2/3 of the nose with the disadvantage being a multiple
stage reconstruction. Most nasal defects will have multiple reconstructive options, and
the surgeon should discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each with the patient
to come to a shared reconstructive path forward that meets patient’s goals.
The complexity of nasal reconstruction increases exponentially once a lining
defect exists. Options available to repairlining defects include nasal turn-in aps,

3 Nasal Reconstruction
37
bipedicled vestibular aps, septal mucoperichondrial aps, composite septal chondromucosal aps, inferior turbinate aps, skin grafts, dual forehead aps, melolabial aps, folded forehead aps, chimeric paramedian-pericranial forehead aps,
and a variety of free aps [8–10, 14, 15, 17, 23]. Nasal turn-in aps are not commonly utilized given the poor vascularity of these aps; however, they can be considered for small internal lining defects limited to the upper and middle thirds of the
nose. For full thickness defects of the alar margin up to 1.0–1.5cm in vertical height,
both the bipedicled vestibular skin advancement ap and folded forehead ap can
be considered [9, 23, 26]. The advantages of the bipedicled vestibular skin advancement ap include its thinness and vascularity, which support cartilaginous grafting
without distorting the reconstructed alar margin [26]. Utilizing a folded forehead
ap in a two-stage approach would undoubtedly leave the patient with a poorly
dened alar margin. However, utilizing a folded forehead ap in a three-stage
approach can obtain a well-dened alar margin in full thickness defects of the alar
margin up to 1.5cm in vertical height [9]. In this approach, an intermediate stage is
added to incise the ap at the designed alar margin, excise the planned excess cutaneous portion of the ap, place cartilaginous grafting, and sculpt the external portion of the ap [9]. The pedicle is then divided, and inset is completed during an
additional third stage 3weeks later.
When present, nasal lining aps are an ideal option for larger lining defects.
Nasal lining aps are thin, pliable, and vascular. They can support cartilaginous
grafting without creating a bulky orstiff reconstruction. The disadvantages include
signicant postoperative crusting while the donor site heals by secondary intention,
the increasedrisk of epistaxis, and the possibility for temporary nasal obstruction
depending on the lining ap utilized. For lining defects larger than 1.5cm of the
lower third, the septal mucoperichondrial hinge ap provides an excellent option,
albeit at the expense of temporary complete nasal obstruction until the hinge pedicle
is divided. For lining defects of the middle third, the dorsal septal mucoperichondrial hinge ap can be used and is transposed from the contralateral septum necessitating a septal stula [23]. The ipsilateral caudal septal mucoperichondrial hinge
ap and contralateral dorsal septal mucoperichondrial hinge ap can be used concurrently to repair large unilateral lining defects involving the middle and lower
thirds [23]. An alternative nasal lining ap is the inferior turbinate mucosal ap [17].
Skin grafts have been utilized in a variety of ways for reconstructing the nasallining [14, 27]. The challenge of using skin grafts for lining reconstruction is that it can
limit the extent and precision of structural grafting and is more prone to failure and
cicatricial forces. When combined with paramedian forehead ap reconstruction of
the nasal skin, one technique to mitigate limited structural grafting is to place a skin
graft in a preliminary operation on the deep surface of the frontalis muscle.In this
initial operation, aplane between the subcutaneous tissue layer and frontalis,is dissected and a silicone sheetor graft is placed.This area is allowed to heal, essentially
creating two vascularized soft tissue paddles that will have some degree of independent mobility andallowing for structural grafting to be placed between the subcutaneous and frontalis tissue planes during a later procedure [27]. Menick describes a
similar method for larger unilateral lining defects involving the alar margin using

38
A. Namin and D. Chan
full thickness skin grafts and a concomitant three-stage forehead ap technique
[14]. A full thickness skin graft is designed for the lining defect and sutured in place
[14]. A forehead ap is utilized and transferred into the defect providing the vascular supply to the skin graft [14]. During the second, intermediate stage, the plane
between the frontalis and subcutaneous tissue is dissected in the area of the middle
and upper thirds, and structural grafting is placed [14]. Inset completion, soft tissue
sculpting, and pedicle division are then completed during the third stage 3weeks later.
In cases of extensive unilateral lining defects where the nasal mucosal ap
options are depleted, or in cases of bilateral nasal defects, options to restore the
nasal lining include skin grafting, dual forehead aps, or free tissue transfer. In
these larger defects requiring extensive structural grafting, skin grafts have many
disadvantages and typically are not an option. Both the anterolateral thigh fascial
ap and the radial forearm free ap have been described with good outcomes in
reconstructing lining defects in total nasal reconstruction while concomitantly using
paramedian forehead aps for the external defect [8, 10, 15].
Preoperative Planning
When assessing a nasal defect, there are multiple variables to consider prior to
designingand nalizing a reconstruction plan. An interview with the patient should
explore prior satisfaction with nasal appearance, prior photos of the patient before
the current deformity, and patient expectations. A discussion of the various options
and advantages/disadvantages must be had. The surgeon should begin to visualize
the planned outcome and the steps necessary to obtain that outcome [22]. The
patient should then be prepared for the reconstructive process, particularly staged
procedures that often times require weeks of deformity that the patient may nd
unacceptable for public appearance. One of the rst variables that should be assessed
is to determine if the defect extends into the adjacent lip, cheek, or periorbital subunits. If the defect does extend into adjacent facial subunits, these should be reconstructed rst in order to restore the nasal platform prior to embarking on the nasal
reconstruction [22]. The nasal subunits should be carefully evaluated [18, 22]. If the
defect involves more than 50% of a convex subunit, particularly the tip or alar subunits, excision of the remaining portion of that subunit should be considered, paired
witha reconstruction that resurfaces the entire subunit [18, 22]. This prevents scarring and trap door defects within subunits, adeformity that is more noticeable when
looking at an individual’s face. When examining a defect, it can be helpful to outline
the nasal subunits.
The depth of the defect should be assessed. The extent of missing epidermis/
dermis, supercial musculoaponeurotic system, osseocartilaginous framework, and
nasal lining is assessed. The extent and depth of missing soft tissue envelope should
be carefully assessed. The thickness of the dermis and supercial musculoaponeurotic system varies signicantly based on location within the nose and skin thickness of the patient. Defects in patients with thick skin or those involving the
supercial musculoaponeurotic system are less favorable for secondary intention

3 Nasal Reconstruction
39
healing or skin graft reconstruction. The location of the various defects should be
noted, and the relationship both in terms of size and location between the nasal lining defect and cutaneous defect should be assessed in order to devise a reconstructive plan for both the external and lining defects.
Finally, the need for structural grafting should be assessed. Although the alar
subunits do not typically contain cartilage, structural grafting to these defects is
prudent in order to prevent alar retraction during the healing process. The alar lobule does contain the tela subcutaneous cutis, which provides structural support to
the alar lobule and is disrupted after trauma or oncologic procedures to the alar
lobule [20]. Missing portions of the osseocartilaginous framework are then
assessed, and a reconstructive plan to replace or repair the osseocartilaginous
framework should be devised. The osseocartilaginous framework can be reconstructed with split calvarial bone grafts, rib grafts, septal grafts, conchal cartilage
grafts, and free tissue transfer. When reconstructing the osseocartilaginous framework, the contralateral side can serve as a mirrored template. An additional consideration when reconstructing the osseocartilaginous framework, particularly the tip,
is the polygon concept, which correlates underlying structural anatomy with surface aesthetics [28]. The ideal tip shape can be broken down into underlying structural polygons: paired dome triangles, paired lateral crurual polygons, interdomal
triangle, paired facet polygons, infralobular polygon, columellar polygon, and
footplate polygon [28]. This concept may be particularly helpful in cases where the
defect is bilateral.
The presence, size, and location of lining defects are then assessed. The extent of
the septal defect, if present, should be analyzed, and any remaining septal cartilage
and/or mucoperichondrium is assessed. Involvement of the nasal oor mucosa and
turbinate should be assessed as well.
Instrument/Equipment Set
• Bipolar electrocautery
• Monopolar electrocautery
• Skin hooks
• Fine-tip dissecting scissors
• Dissolvable and permanent sutures
• Doppler probe
• Flap Design/Surgical Technique
The reconstructive surgeon will encounter a wide variety of nasal defects, ranging from small cutaneous defects that are amenable to secondary intention healing
to septorhinectomy defects that often times require free tissue transfer, structural
grafting, and regional tissue transfer to resurface the defect. Both local (Chap. 1)
and regional aps (Chap. 2) are excellent tools in a variety of nasal defects, and the
techniques for these reconstructions are discussed elsewhere in this text. In this section, the surgical technique of various lining aps will be discussed.

40
A. Namin and D. Chan
The bipedicled vestibular skin advancement ap is based off a pedicle to the
septum at the anterior septal angle and a pedicle at the lateral oor of the vestibule
[26]. The dimensions of the lining defect are measured, and the remaining vestibular skin up to the planned intercartilaginous incision is then assessed to ensure adequate ap dimension. The vestibular skin is then inltrated with local anesthesia
prior to incision and elevation. An intercartilaginous incision is then made extending from the anterior septal angle to the lateral oor of the nasal vestibule [23, 26].
The pedicled ap is then elevated off the underlying lower lateral cartilage, which is
a difcult dissection if hydrodissection with local anesthesia was not performed
rst. Structural grafting is then placed along the planned alar margin and secured to
the pedicled vestibular skin advancement ap. Depending on the extent of the cutaneous deformity and operative plans, a paramedian forehead ap or melolabial ap
is then utilized to reconstruct the cutaneous defect and secured to the pedicled vestibular ap along the alar margin.
The septal mucoperichondrial hinge ap is based along the caudal septum supplied by the septal branch of the labial artery [23, 26]. The plane between the septal
cartilage and mucoperichondrium is inltrated with local anesthesia ipsilateral to
the side of the defect. The dorsal incision parallels the nasal dorsum and is begun
about 1cm posterior to the anterior septal angle and 1cm inferior to the roof of the
middle vault [23]. The caudal incision begins 1cm posterior to the anterior nasal
spine and continues posteriorly parallel to the nasal crest [23]. The posterior incision connects the dorsal and caudal incisions and is typically designed in a fashion
so that ap length is at least 4cm [23]. The ap is then elevated from the septal
cartilage in standard fashion and hinged inferiorly to reconstruct the lining defect.
The dorsal septal mucoperichondrial hinge ap is based off the contralateral septum and hinged dorsally [23]. This reconstruction necessitates a septal stula. The
inferior turbinate mucosal ap is based anteriorly and is an additional nasal lining
ap. The turbinate is liberally injected with local anesthesia and is then separated
from the nasal sidewall from posterior to anterior [17]. Once the bony turbinate is
separated from the nasal sidewall, the mucosa is dissected off the turbinatebone
keeping its pedicle attached anteriorly [17]. The bony turbinate is then removed and
can be used for grafting if deemed useful [17].
Postoperative Management
Standard postoperative care is undertaken. Depending on the ablative portion of the
procedure, most patients undergoing reconstructive surgery with facial regional
aps can be discharged home on the same day. Wound care instructions regarding
the incision lines and the exposed surfaces of interpolated aps are given to the
patients. Patients are typically seen at 1week postoperatively for suture removal and
an initialassessment of healing. Signs of ap loss, infection, and dehiscence are
examined for. In cases of staged procedures, the patient is prepared for the next
stage of the reconstruction.

3 Nasal Reconstruction
41
References
1. Shokri T, Kadakia S, Saman M, Habal MB, Kohlert S, Sokoya M, etal. The paramedian forehead
ap for nasal reconstruction: from antiquity to present. J Craniofac Surg. 2019;30(2):330–3.
2. Mcdowell F, Valone JA, Brown JB.Bibliography and historical note on plastic surgery of the
nose. Plast Reconstr Surg 1946. 1952;10(3):149–85.
3. Kazanjian VH.The repair of nasal defects with the median forehead ap; primary closure of
forehead wound. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1946;83:37–49.
4. Baker SR, Johnson TM, Nelson BR.The importance of maintaining the alar-facial sulcus in
nasal reconstruction. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1995;121(6):617–22.
5. Millard DR. Total reconstructive rhinoplasty and a missing link. Plast Reconstr Surg.
1966;37(3):167–83.
6. Harrison L, Sieffert M, Kadakia S, Kadakia S, Johnson RM, Ducic Y.Reconstruction of a
subtotal septorhinectomy defect with a chimeric paramedian-pericranial forehead ap. Am J
Otolaryngol. 2019;40(3):445–7.
7. Abdelwahab M, Kandathil CK, Most SP, Spataro EA.Utility of indocyanine green angiography to identify clinical factors associated with perfusion of paramedian forehead aps during
nasal reconstruction surgery. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2019;21(3):206–12.
8. Seth R, Revenaugh PC, Scharpf J, Shipchandler TZ, Fritz MA.Free anterolateral thigh fascia
lata ap for complex nasal lining defects. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2013;15(1):21–8.
9. Menick FJ.A 10-year experience in nasal reconstruction with the three-stage forehead ap.
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002;109(6):1839–55; discussion 1856–61.
10. Salibian AH, Menick FJ, Talley J.Microvascular reconstruction of the nose with the radial
forearm ap: a 17-year experience in 47 patients. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019;144(1):199–210.
11. Saban Y, Andretto Amodeo C, Hammou JC, Polselli R.An anatomical study of the nasal
supercial musculoaponeurotic system: surgical applications in rhinoplasty. Arch Facial
Plast Surg. 2008;10(2):109–15.
12. Samra S, Steitz JT, Hajnas N, Toriumi DM.Surgical management of nasal valve collapse.
Otolaryngol Clin N Am. 2018;51(5):929–44.
13. Kosins AM, Daniel RK.Decision making in preservation rhinoplasty: a 100 case series with
one-year follow-up. Aesthet Surg J. 2020;40(1):34–48.
14. Menick FJ.The use of skin grafts for nasal lining. Clin Plast Surg. 2001;28(2):311–21. viii
15. Winslow CP, Cook TA, Burke A, Wax MK.Total nasal reconstruction: utility of the free radial
forearm fascial ap. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2003;5(2):159–63.
16. Burget GC, Menick FJ.Nasal reconstruction: seeking a fourth dimension. Plast Reconstr Surg.
1986;78(2):145–57.
17. Murakami CS, Kriet JD, Ierokomos AP. Nasal reconstruction using the inferior turbinate
mucosal ap. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 1999;1(2):97–100.
18. Burget GC, Menick FJ.The subunit principle in nasal reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg.
1985;76(2):239–47.
19. Daniel RK, Palhazi P. Rhinoplasty: an anatomical and clinical atlas. 2018. Springer Publishers.
20. Daniel RK, Glasz T, Molnar G, Palhazi P, Saban Y, Journel B.The lower nasal base: an anatomical study. Aesthet Surg J. 2013;33(2):222–32.
21. Saban Y, Daniel RK, Polselli R, Trapasso M, Palhazi P. Dorsal preservation: the push down
technique reassessed. Aesthet Surg J. 2018;38(2):117–31.
22. Menick FJ. Nasal reconstruction: art and practice. 2009. Elsevier Health Sciences.
23. Baker SR. Local aps in facial reconstruction. 2021. Elsevier Publishing.
24. Viciana EJ, Lessard A-S.V-Y ap for nasal reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open.
2020;8(8):e3040.
25. Johnson TM, Swanson NA, Baker SR, Brown MD, Nelson BR.The rieger ap for nasal reconstruction. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1995;121(6):634–7.
26. Burget GC, Menick FJ.Nasal support and lining: the marriage of beauty and blood supply.
Plast Reconstr Surg. 1989;84(2):189–202.

42
27. Alagöz MS, Işken T, Sen C, Onyedi M, Izmirli H, Yücel E.Three-dimensional nasal reconstruction using a prefabricated forehead ap: case report. Aesthet Plast Surg. 2008;32(1):166–71.
28. Çakır B, Öreroğlu AR, Daniel RK.Surface aesthetics in tip rhinoplasty: a step-by-step guide.
Aesthet Surg J. 2014;34(6):941–55.
A. Namin and D. Chan
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
