Cargando…

Comparison of Blepharoptosis Correction Using Müller-aponeurosis Composite Flap Advancement and Frontalis Muscle Transfer

BACKGROUND: Treatments for severe blepharoptosis are well documented and include the most common operations for restoring upper eyelid ptosis, which are levator surgery and frontal muscle transfers; however, the choice of treatment is still controversial. There are different approaches to the restor...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Park, David Dae Hawan, Ramadhan, Anwar, Han, Dong Gil, Shim, Jeong Su, Lee, Yong Jig, Ha, Won Ho, Lee, Byung Kwon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4236361/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25426383
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000094
_version_ 1782345148922855424
author Park, David Dae Hawan
Ramadhan, Anwar
Han, Dong Gil
Shim, Jeong Su
Lee, Yong Jig
Ha, Won Ho
Lee, Byung Kwon
author_facet Park, David Dae Hawan
Ramadhan, Anwar
Han, Dong Gil
Shim, Jeong Su
Lee, Yong Jig
Ha, Won Ho
Lee, Byung Kwon
author_sort Park, David Dae Hawan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Treatments for severe blepharoptosis are well documented and include the most common operations for restoring upper eyelid ptosis, which are levator surgery and frontal muscle transfers; however, the choice of treatment is still controversial. There are different approaches to the restoration of upper eyelid ptosis, and the choice will be based on ptosis severity and the surgeon’s skill and experience. METHODS: Two hundred and fourteen patients presenting with a levator function of between 2 and 4 mm received ptosis correction between 1991 and 2010 at our clinic. Of these, 71 patients underwent Müller aponeurosis composite flap advancement for correction of 89 eyelids, and frontalis muscle transfer was performed on 143 patients (217 eyelids). Postoperative results were evaluated with an average follow-up period of 23 months. RESULTS: The preoperative average for marginal reflex distance (MRD(1)) in the Müller aponeurosis composite flap advancement group was 1.25 mm, and in the frontal muscle transfer group, it was 0.59 mm. The area of corneal exposure (ACE) was 57.2% in the Müller aponeurosis composite flap advancement group and 53.6% in the frontal muscle transfer group. The postoperative average distance was not significantly different for the 2 techniques. In the Müller aponeurosis composite flap advancement group, MRD(1) was 2.7 mm and ACE was improved to 73.5%. In the frontal muscle transfer group, MRD(1) was 2.3 mm and ACE was 71.2%. Undercorrection and eyelid asymmetry were the most frequently observed postoperative complications for both techniques. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, we confirmed that Müller aponeurosis composite flap advancement and the frontalis transfer technique are both effective in the correction of severe blepharoptosis; our results showed no significant differences between the 2 techniques.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4236361
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42363612014-11-25 Comparison of Blepharoptosis Correction Using Müller-aponeurosis Composite Flap Advancement and Frontalis Muscle Transfer Park, David Dae Hawan Ramadhan, Anwar Han, Dong Gil Shim, Jeong Su Lee, Yong Jig Ha, Won Ho Lee, Byung Kwon Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Original Articles BACKGROUND: Treatments for severe blepharoptosis are well documented and include the most common operations for restoring upper eyelid ptosis, which are levator surgery and frontal muscle transfers; however, the choice of treatment is still controversial. There are different approaches to the restoration of upper eyelid ptosis, and the choice will be based on ptosis severity and the surgeon’s skill and experience. METHODS: Two hundred and fourteen patients presenting with a levator function of between 2 and 4 mm received ptosis correction between 1991 and 2010 at our clinic. Of these, 71 patients underwent Müller aponeurosis composite flap advancement for correction of 89 eyelids, and frontalis muscle transfer was performed on 143 patients (217 eyelids). Postoperative results were evaluated with an average follow-up period of 23 months. RESULTS: The preoperative average for marginal reflex distance (MRD(1)) in the Müller aponeurosis composite flap advancement group was 1.25 mm, and in the frontal muscle transfer group, it was 0.59 mm. The area of corneal exposure (ACE) was 57.2% in the Müller aponeurosis composite flap advancement group and 53.6% in the frontal muscle transfer group. The postoperative average distance was not significantly different for the 2 techniques. In the Müller aponeurosis composite flap advancement group, MRD(1) was 2.7 mm and ACE was improved to 73.5%. In the frontal muscle transfer group, MRD(1) was 2.3 mm and ACE was 71.2%. Undercorrection and eyelid asymmetry were the most frequently observed postoperative complications for both techniques. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, we confirmed that Müller aponeurosis composite flap advancement and the frontalis transfer technique are both effective in the correction of severe blepharoptosis; our results showed no significant differences between the 2 techniques. Wolters Kluwer Health 2014-09-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4236361/ /pubmed/25426383 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000094 Text en Copyright © 2014 The Authors. Published by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins on behalf of The American Society of Plastic Surgeons. PRS Global Open is a publication of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License, where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Park, David Dae Hawan
Ramadhan, Anwar
Han, Dong Gil
Shim, Jeong Su
Lee, Yong Jig
Ha, Won Ho
Lee, Byung Kwon
Comparison of Blepharoptosis Correction Using Müller-aponeurosis Composite Flap Advancement and Frontalis Muscle Transfer
title Comparison of Blepharoptosis Correction Using Müller-aponeurosis Composite Flap Advancement and Frontalis Muscle Transfer
title_full Comparison of Blepharoptosis Correction Using Müller-aponeurosis Composite Flap Advancement and Frontalis Muscle Transfer
title_fullStr Comparison of Blepharoptosis Correction Using Müller-aponeurosis Composite Flap Advancement and Frontalis Muscle Transfer
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Blepharoptosis Correction Using Müller-aponeurosis Composite Flap Advancement and Frontalis Muscle Transfer
title_short Comparison of Blepharoptosis Correction Using Müller-aponeurosis Composite Flap Advancement and Frontalis Muscle Transfer
title_sort comparison of blepharoptosis correction using müller-aponeurosis composite flap advancement and frontalis muscle transfer
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4236361/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25426383
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000094
work_keys_str_mv AT parkdaviddaehawan comparisonofblepharoptosiscorrectionusingmulleraponeurosiscompositeflapadvancementandfrontalismuscletransfer
AT ramadhananwar comparisonofblepharoptosiscorrectionusingmulleraponeurosiscompositeflapadvancementandfrontalismuscletransfer
AT handonggil comparisonofblepharoptosiscorrectionusingmulleraponeurosiscompositeflapadvancementandfrontalismuscletransfer
AT shimjeongsu comparisonofblepharoptosiscorrectionusingmulleraponeurosiscompositeflapadvancementandfrontalismuscletransfer
AT leeyongjig comparisonofblepharoptosiscorrectionusingmulleraponeurosiscompositeflapadvancementandfrontalismuscletransfer
AT hawonho comparisonofblepharoptosiscorrectionusingmulleraponeurosiscompositeflapadvancementandfrontalismuscletransfer
AT leebyungkwon comparisonofblepharoptosiscorrectionusingmulleraponeurosiscompositeflapadvancementandfrontalismuscletransfer