Nasal Reconstruction and Repair of Secondary Nasal Deformities Following Treatment of Nasal Hemangiomas.

BACKGROUND

Secondary nasal deformities and retardation of development due to treatment of nasal hemangioma during infancy are a challenge when it comes to nasal reconstruction. In order to evaluate nasal repair and reconstruction in these patients, the authors compared the ease and outcomes of using expanded forehead, nasolabial sulcus, and medial upper arm tube flaps.

METHODS

According to the deformities and patients' wishes, flaps were selected; using autogeneic rib cartilage, auricle cartilage, or silica gel as a scaffold or without framework; the inner lining were made by the residual scar tissue or the distal end of transferred flap. The esthetical and functional scores were recorded by the Nasal Appearance and Function Evaluation Questionnaire score to evaluate the effectiveness of the methods.

RESULTS

From January 2010 to December 2015, 34 patients were included. Postoperative follow-up went for 12 to 36 months. The expanded forehead flap was used in 28 patients, the nasolabial sulcus flap in 5 patients, and the medial upper arm tube flap in 1 patient. Regarding framework, 20 patients used rib cartilage, 8 patients used auricle cartilage, 1 patient used silicone, and 5 patients did not use any framework. All patients reported the increasing nasal appearance and function evaluation.

CONCLUSION

Repair of secondary nasal defects following treatment of hemangiomas in infants and young children using an expanded frontal flap and autogenous cartilage framework is a reliable method with great long-term esthetic results. The nasolabial sulcus flap is a relatively simple method, especially for patients with a unilateral nasal alar defect. Supporting structure is needed and appropriate overcorrection is necessary.