Advertisement

Management of Full-Thickness Nasal Defects

  • Kagan Ipci
  • Nuray Bayar Muluk
  • Gabriela Kopacheva-Barsova
Chapter

Abstract

The nose is one of the most noticeable parts of the face, and reconstruction encompasses modifications that are not well hidden. The three-dimensional protrusion of the nose affords only small structural alterations to reduce any complications. Therefore, restoration of an imperfection is challenging due to the aforementioned reasons. Surgery consultation comprises of the malformation assessment as well as an open dialogue with the patient about any apprehensiveness or specific questions about the procedure or end result. Numerous features must be considered for the reconstruction process, including color, texture, contouring, and functionality. For small (<1.5 cm) zone 1 defects, there are multiple options. For large ones, a forehead flap is useful for the dorsal and sidewall subunits. For the sidewall, a melolabial flap is a good choice. Zone 2 defects may be complex to repair due to the nasal tip prominence. The skin grafting is difficult and mostly acquired from the forehead or adjacent area. Bilobed flaps, full-thickness grafts from the forehead can be used. For larger defects in zone 3, there are many options of reconstruction. The radial forearm flap is commonly used and is based on the radial artery and vein as well as some soft tissue. This method can be used to restructure the nasal coating or for a total reconstruction. In this chapter, management of full-thickness nasal defects is presented.

Keywords

Full-thickness nasal defects Reconstruction Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 

References

  1. 1.
    Sajjadian A. Nasal reconstruction. In: Meyers AD (Ed.), Medscape. http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/876456-overview#showall (Accessed online at March 20, 2015).
  2. 2.
    Burget GC, Menick FJ. Nasal reconstruction: seeking a fourth dimension. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1986;78(2):145–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burget GC, Menick FJ. Nasal support and lining: the marriage of beauty and blood supply. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1989;84(2):189–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burget GC, Menick FJ. The subunit principle in nasal reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1985;76(2):239–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Parrett BM, Pribaz JJ. An algorithm for treatment of nasal defects. Clin Plast Surg. 2009;36(3):407–20. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00941298/36/3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yong JS, Christophel JJ, Park SS. Repair of intermediate-size nasal defects: a working algorithm. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014;140(11):1027–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Goldberg LH, Alam M. Horizontal advancement flap for symmetric reconstruction of small to medium-sized cutaneous defects of the lateral nasal supratip. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003;49(4):685–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lambert RW, Dzubow LM. A dorsal nasal advancement flap for off-midline defects. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2004;50(3):380–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mustardè JC. Reconstruction of the lower eyelid. In: Mustardè JC, editor. Repair and reconstruction in the orbital region. 3th ed. London: Churchill Livingstone; 1991. p. 125–90.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thomson HG, Vanderby MB. Free autogenous transplants in preformed pseudosheath silicone rubber pockets. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1976;56:698–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Burget GC. Discussion to Menick FJ. A 10-year experience in nasal reconstruction with the three-stage forehead flap. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002;109:1856–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Malard O, Lanhouet J, Michel G, et al. Full-thickness nasal defect: place of prosthetic reconstruction. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2015;132(2):85–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anorl.2014.02.007. Epub 2014 Dec 23CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Flood TR, Russell K. Reconstruction of nasal defects with implant-retained nasal prostheses. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1998;36(5):341–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Daculsi G, Laboux O, Malard O, et al. Current state of the art of biphasic calcium phosphate bioceramics. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2003;14(3):195–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kagan Ipci
    • 1
  • Nuray Bayar Muluk
    • 2
  • Gabriela Kopacheva-Barsova
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of OtorhinolaryngologyAnkara Koru HospitalAnkaraTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Medical FacultyKırıkkale UniversityKırıkkaleTurkey
  3. 3.Faculty of Medicine, Cyril and Methodius University of SkopjeSkopjeRepublic of Macedonia

Personalised recommendations