Combination of secondary intention healing and primary closure to reconstruct large facial defects.

Secondary intention healing has been a well-established method to close wounds for more than 200 years. Indeed, it represents the easiest technique in the ladder of plastic reconstruction. Primary wound closure (side-to-side closure, direct wound closure) is the second easiest method. The combination of these two techniques is already an integral aspect of specific surgical procedures, e.g. the reconstruction of the donor site of a paramedian forehead flap. This minireview will show that the combination is also a suitable alternative to classic flaps in reconstruction of different aesthetic subunits of the face. These are the scalp, the lateral cheek, the upper nasal sidewall/medial canthus and the retroauricular region. The advantages and disadvantages will be discussed and illustrated with clinical examples.

[Analysis of the postoperative outcome of 81 cases of nasal reconstruction with direct closure]. / Analyse des postoperativen Verlaufs nach 81 Dehnungsplastiken an der Nase.

BACKGROUND: Direct wound closure (side-to-side closure) for closing nasal defects, is controversially discussed. Yet, data supporting one or the other are lacking. MATERIAL AND METHOD: An explorative, partly retrospective, partly prospective observational study including 81 patients was carried out for assessment of the operative results of after direct wound closure stretching rhinoplasty. The occurrence of complications, the esthetic result and influencing factors were examined. To assess the esthetic result the patient and observer scar assessment scale (POSAS) scores of patients and observers were determined. In both scores seven values were determined (1 point normal skin, 10 points worst imaginable scar). The individual values were added to give a total value (minimum 7-maximum 70). RESULTS: After direct wound closure stretching rhinoplasty, 12 out of 81 patients (15 %) developed complications, in 5 cases suture dehiscence, in 5 cases cyst formation, in 4 cases a wound infection and 2 patients developed cyst formation and a wound infection. All suture dehiscences occurred on the lower third of the nose. Most of the patients were satisfied and assessed the scar with an average total value of 13.4 ± 7.07 (minimum 7, maximum 70, n = 42). In the individual assessments pain (1.14 ± 0.57; minimum 1, maximum 10) was rated best and scar color (2.50 ± 1.76; minimum 1, maximum 10) was rated worst. The total assessment in the observer-POSAS was also good with 12.9 ± 4.8 (minimum 7, maximum 70; n = 32). Elasticity was rated best (1.47 ± 0.88; minimum 1, maximum 7) and scar pigmentation (2.34 ± 1.54; minimum 1, maximum 7) worst. No correlations with a complication were found. CONCLUSION: Direct wound closure stretching rhinoplasty is a safe method, especially for defect coverage in the upper two thirds of the soft tissue covering the nose, which in most cases achieved a good cosmetic result.