Nasal alar reconstruction: A critical analysis using melolabial island and paramedian forehead flaps

Objectives: To qualitatively and quantitatively describe aesthetic and functional outcomes following Mohs ablative surgery involving the alar subunit, using a paramedian or subcutaneous melolabial island flap. Study Design: Retrospective review. Methods: A single surgeon's results in 38 consecu...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Laryngoscope 1999-03, Vol.109 (3), p.376-382
Main Authors: Arden, Richard L., Nawroz-Danish, Myra, Yoo, George H., Meleca, Robert J., Burgio, Don L.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Biological and medical sciences
Carcinoma, Basal Cell - surgery
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell - surgery
Cicatrix - etiology
Esthetics
Female
Head and neck surgery. Maxillofacial surgery. Dental surgery. Orthodontics
Humans
Male
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Mohs Surgery
Nose Neoplasms - surgery
Patient Satisfaction
Postoperative Complications - etiology
Retrospective Studies
Rhinoplasty
Skin Neoplasms - surgery
Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases
Surgery of the upper aerodigestive tract
Surgical Flaps
Treatment Outcome
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objectives: To qualitatively and quantitatively describe aesthetic and functional outcomes following Mohs ablative surgery involving the alar subunit, using a paramedian or subcutaneous melolabial island flap. Study Design: Retrospective review. Methods: A single surgeon's results in 38 consecutive patients were analyzed. Objective measures (alar rim thickness, donor scar width and length), subjective assessment (seven aesthetic parameters) by three academic otolaryngologists, and patient satisfaction questionnaires were evaluated. Student t test was used to ascertain statistically significant differences between reconstructive groups. Results: Questionnaire results demonstrate a significant (P = .026) difference in donor site rating favoring melolabial group responses. Objective scar measurements and subjective ratings of textural quality and alar notching also favored melolabial reconstructions. Conclusions: More favorable aesthetic and functional outcomes are seen with single subunit cutaneous alar defects reconstructed with the melolabial island flap than with deep composite or extensive unilateral nasal defects reconstructed with the paramedian forehead flap.
ISSN:0023-852X
1531-4995
DOI:10.1097/00005537-199903000-00007