Li Ji-Rong, Qin Xia-Nan, Li Xiao-Dan, Hu Song-Bai, Long Xing, Huang Xue-Zhao
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430079, China.
Zhonghua Zheng Xing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2004 Jul;20(4):245-7.
To evaluate the advantages, disadvantages and their indications of total nasal reconstruction with different techniques.
A series of total nasal reconstruction were treated with four methods from 1975 to 2003. These methods were tubed flap of arm,midline forehead flap with skin graft, midline forehead flap with bilateral frontotemporal flaps for repairing the donor site, and expanded forehead flap.
All of the patients were treated successfully. The shape and function of the reconstructed noses were satisfactory. However, the traditional forehead flap with skin graft may leave a unsightly big and black scar on the forehead. The technique of the tubed flap of arm could provide enough tissue without remaining forehead scar and be easily shaped, but it required long period, multiple procedures and body fixation for three weeks.
Midline forehead flap with bilateral frontotemporal flaps for repairing the donor site may be good for small nose reconstruction while expanded forehead flap could reconstruct a big nose. Tubed flap of arm may be used to the patients who do not wish to leave any scar on the forehead. Forehead flap with skin graft to repair the donor sit- should generally be avoided for nose reconstruction.
