Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Comparison Competence Nasolabial and Forehead Flap for Reparation Nasal Tissue Defect of Basal Cell Carcinoma

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Both nasolabial and forehead flaps are utilized for the reparation of nasal soft tissue defects that result from basal cell carcinoma. Utilizing the forehead flap needs twice operation for scar correction and flap base amputation while the nasolabial flap is a more effective one-stage technique.

Material and methods

This prospective study was performed on patients with BCC involving nasal tip and ala regions based on the results of the initial biopsy and was admitted to the surgery department of the Loghman-Hakim Hospital to resect the lesion.

Results

The paramedian forehead flap, in contrast with the nasolabial flap, covers more tissue defects (nasolabial flap 14.38 mm and paramedian forehead flap 19 mm). Patients’ satisfaction with the nasolabial flap was much higher than the paramedian forehead flap (nasolabial flap 94.9% and paramedian forehead flap 91.1%). The need to modify the flap donor site scar of the paramedian forehead flap was much higher than the nasolabial flap (paramedian forehead flap 100%). Infiltrative BCC tumor was the most prevalent one in both the nasolabial and paramedian forehead flaps as compared with other types of BCC (nasolabial flap 38.5% and paramedian forehead flap 54.5%).

Conclusion

This study aimed at comparing the nasolabial flap and paramedian forehead flap for nasal tissue defect repair caused by basal cell carcinoma, attempting to highlight the advantages and disadvantages of each technique. The nasolabial flap is found to be more time-efficient, provides better patient satisfaction, and results in less noticeable scarring, while the paramedian forehead flap offers greater coverage for larger defects. Further studies are needed to assess long-term outcomes and provide more comprehensive evidence on efficacy and complications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Brunicardi F, Andersen D, Billiar T, Dunn D, Hunter J, Matthews J et al (2015) Schwartz’s principles of surgery, 10th edn. McGraw-Hill Education, New York, pp 1831–1835

    Google Scholar 

  2. Mccarthy JG, MD Lawrence, Bell D. Professor of plastic surgery and director of reconstructive New York University Medical Center vol 3. pp 1933–1987

  3. Bullocks JM, Hsu PW, Izaddoost SA (2017) Plastic surgery principle and techniques, vol 1, 2nd edn. Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  4. Zollinger RM, Ellison EC (2016) Zollinger’s atlas of surgical operations, 10th edn. McGraw Hill LLC

  5. Tan NC, Huahsieh C, Riva FMG, Jenny SF (2013) The nasolabial flap as a one-stage procedure for reconstruction of intermediate-to-large lip defects with functional and aesthetic assessments. J Plast Reconstruct Aesthet Surg 66:352–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Russell D, Brigg MD, Karen H, Calhoun MD (2001) Department of otolaryngology, Garmel Rounds presentation October 3, 2001

  7. Robert S, Andrew S, Luigi S (2015) American Academy of Dermatology and MOHS surgery. pp 23–34

  8. Courtney M. Townsend, MD, Mark Evers B, MD, Daniel Beauchamp, MD Sabiston textbook of surgery 20th Edition vol1 747.2017

  9. Shetty SK, Sarkar S (2019) The versatility of nasolabial flaps in maxillofacial surgery. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 18(4):589–595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-018-1162-8. (Epub 2018 Oct 8)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Correa BJ, Weathers WM, Wolfswinkel EM, Thornton JF (2013) The forehead flap: the gold standard of nasal soft tissue reconstruction. Semin Plast Surg 27(2):96–103. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1351231

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Hakim E, Behravesh S, Zadeh MH (2020) Comparison of the nasolabial flap and paramedian forehead flap in the reconstruction of nasal defects. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 78(3):358–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2019.09.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Piazza C, Taglietti V, Paderno A et al (2020) Nasolabial versus forehead flap in nasal reconstruction: patient-reported outcomes, objective outcomes, and aesthetic evaluations. Head Neck 42(2):219–229. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.25973

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kallappa S, Shah N (2019) Outcome of nasolabial flap in the reconstruction of head and neck defects. Indian J Surg Oncol 10(4):577–581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13193-019-00948-z. (Epub 2019 Jul 17)

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Tang C, Yan X, Jiao J et al (2021) Nasolabial flap versus paramedian forehead flap for nasal reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 79(5):1002–1015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2020.11.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Chakraborty SS, Goel AD, Sahu RK, Midya M, Acharya S, Shakrawal N (2023) Effectiveness of nasolabial flap versus paramedian forehead flap for nasal reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Aesthet Plast Surg 47(1):313–329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-022-03060-w. (Epub 2022 Sep 14)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hu W, Fan C, Li Q et al (2020) Comparative study of nasolabial and forehead flaps for nasal reconstruction after malignant tumor excision. J Craniofac Surg 31(4):e389–e394. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000006164

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks to the Loghman-Hakim Hospital’s clinical personnel who sincerely helped the researchers to conduct the present study.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Loghman Hakim Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Fariborz Rashnoo

  2. Department of Surgery, Loqman-Hakim Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Rooh Allah Yegane & Ali Hassanpour

Authors
  1. Fariborz Rashnoo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rooh Allah Yegane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ali Hassanpour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rooh Allah Yegane.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval has been granted by the medical school of Shahid-Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (IR.SBMU.MSP.REC.1395.24).

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rashnoo, F., Yegane, R.A. & Hassanpour, A. The Comparison Competence Nasolabial and Forehead Flap for Reparation Nasal Tissue Defect of Basal Cell Carcinoma. J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-023-02093-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-023-02093-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation