Please login or create an account. If you do not have access to this content, you will be shown a 30 second preview and licensing options.

  • Presentation

Single-Stage Reconstruction of Larger Nasal Defects Without Interpolated Flaps

Description

The speaker reviews single-stage options for reconstructing larger nasal defects without interpolated flaps, emphasizing that many defects traditionally treated with multi-stage flaps can sometimes be managed with one-stage techniques depending on defect location, size, and patient skin laxity. He first discusses the crescentic advancement flap for defects of the nasal sidewall, ala, and dorsum, stressing correct flap sizing, minimizing alar distortion, preserving the alar groove, and using the piriform aperture to tack down the flap and prevent tenting or bridging. He notes that secondary intention can be intentionally left in selected areas and that bilateral nasolabial fold symmetry matters. He then covers multi-lobe flaps, including bilobe and trilobe designs, which can be extended to larger defects on the nasal tip and sidewall when properly planned around standing cones and rotation arcs. He explains that more distal tip defects may favor trilobe flaps, and larger or awkward defects can still heal well with these approaches, sometimes requiring additional lobes. For full-thickness defects or loss of the alar rim, he presents the Spear flap, which folds local tissue over itself after mucosal repair to reconstruct lining and rim without detaching an interpolated flap. Finally, he describes composite grafts for smaller alar rim defects, noting their metabolic demands, the importance of careful postoperative care, and that they can work well in selected patients who are poor candidates for staged reconstruction. Overall, the talk emphasizes thoughtful design, patient selection, and combining techniques when needed to achieve good cosmetic and functional outcomes.

View more

Conclusions

  • Single-stage local flap techniques can successfully reconstruct many larger central facial and nasal defects that might otherwise be treated with multistage interpolated flaps.
  • For crescentic advancement flaps, the defect width should be balanced against anticipated secondary movement, with careful attention to tension vectors and alar support to avoid alar lift or notching.
  • Pexing the flap to the pyriform ligament can reduce bridging and tenting and improve the stability of nasal sidewall and alar reconstructions.
  • Targeted second-intention healing in the alar groove can be beneficial and should not be avoided when it helps preserve natural contour.
  • Patient skin laxity and tissue character strongly influence whether a given nasal defect can be closed with a local flap alone or requires additional techniques.
  • Nasolabial fold symmetry matters cosmetically, and neglecting it can create a noticeable penalty even when the defect itself is closed well.
  • Bilobed and trilobed flaps can be expanded beyond traditional small-defect indications and can provide excellent outcomes for intermediate and even larger nasal tip defects.
  • Choosing between bilobed and trilobed designs depends on defect location, with more distal defects favoring trilobed solutions and more proximal tip defects often suitable for bilobed repair.
  • Standing cone geometry and lobe angles are critical determinants of rotation, alar distortion, and final contour in multilobed flap reconstruction.
  • Multilobed flaps can sometimes be extended to unusually complex or multilaminar defects and may avert the need for more complex staged reconstruction.
  • The spear flap is a useful option for devastating full-thickness alar defects because it can reconstruct the nostril rim by folding and laminating nasolabial tissue rather than detaching an interpolated flap.
  • Composite grafts are best reserved for small alar rim defects because they are highly metabolically demanding and have limited size tolerance.
  • Composite graft success depends heavily on meticulous technique and postoperative care, including secure internal fixation and close wound management.
  • Overall, the presentation argues that thoughtful design and technique selection allow surgeons to ‘get out of trouble’ with single-stage reconstruction in many challenging nasal defects.
  • Mellette JR, Harrington AC. Applications of the Crescentic Advancement Flap. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1991;17:447-454.#10.1111/j.1524-4725.1991.tb03981.x
  • Cook JL. The Undesirable Influence of Reconstructive Procedures on the Symmetry of the Nasolabial Folds. Dermatol Surg. 2005;31:1409-1416.#10.1097/00042728-200511000-00006
  • Zitelli JA. The Bilobed Flap for Nasal Reconstruction. Arch Dermatol. 1989 Jul;125(7):957-959.#10.1001/archderm.1989.01670190091012
  • Knackstedt T, Lee K, Jelinek N. The Differential Use of Bilobed and Trilobed Transposition Flaps in Cutaneous Nasal Reconstructive Surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;142(2):511-519.#10.1097/prs.0000000000004583
  • Albertini JG, Hansen JP. Trilobed Flap Reconstruction for Distal Nasal Skin Defects. Dermatol Surg. 2010;36(11):1726-1735.#10.1111/j.1524-4725.2010.01671.x
  • Multilobed flaps for intermediate and large nasal defects: Flap characteristics, patient outcomes, and provider experience at two institutions. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2022 Aug;75(8):2757-2774.#10.1016/j.bjps.2022.04.023