Cargando…

Antia-Buch versus Franssen-Frechner Technique

BACKGROUND: We performed a retrospective study comparing 2 patient groups. Each cohort included 22 cases of skin cancer of the external ear. Each patient required resection of the affected part of the external ear, followed by flap reconstruction. METHODS: The patients in Cohort A underwent external...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abdelkader, Rasha, Malahias, Marco, Abdalbary, Sahar Ahmed, Noaman, Ayman
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7989990/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33777603
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000003498
_version_ 1783669001210036224
author Abdelkader, Rasha
Malahias, Marco
Abdalbary, Sahar Ahmed
Noaman, Ayman
author_facet Abdelkader, Rasha
Malahias, Marco
Abdalbary, Sahar Ahmed
Noaman, Ayman
author_sort Abdelkader, Rasha
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: We performed a retrospective study comparing 2 patient groups. Each cohort included 22 cases of skin cancer of the external ear. Each patient required resection of the affected part of the external ear, followed by flap reconstruction. METHODS: The patients in Cohort A underwent external ear reconstruction with a classic Antia-Buch flap, as described by Antia and Buch in 1967: The defect was closed by mobilizing an advancement flap from the root of the helix (upper ear), which was closed in a V-Y fashion, after a rim of healthy scaphal cartilage was resected to allow approximation of the skin. The patients in Cohort B underwent external ear reconstruction with a modified Antia-Buch flap, as presented by Franssen and Frechner in 2010. Here, a wedge of skin was removed from the ear lobe (lower ear), to allow mobilization of an advancement flap from the caudal end of the ear, to close the defect. RESULTS: Both techniques allowed tension-free closure. Cohort B, however, required less dissection of the ear. The entire cephalic ear remained unaffected and no scaphal cartilage was sacrificed, thus preserving ear width, with scars that were overall less visible. Also, the loss in ear height associated with Cohort B was easily symmetrized by contralateral ear lobe reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Cohort B achieved closure with less ear dissection, achieving excellent morphological outcomes. The patients in Cohort B had superior levels of satisfaction with scars and ear symmetry than those in Cohort A.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7989990
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79899902021-03-25 Antia-Buch versus Franssen-Frechner Technique Abdelkader, Rasha Malahias, Marco Abdalbary, Sahar Ahmed Noaman, Ayman Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Cosmetic BACKGROUND: We performed a retrospective study comparing 2 patient groups. Each cohort included 22 cases of skin cancer of the external ear. Each patient required resection of the affected part of the external ear, followed by flap reconstruction. METHODS: The patients in Cohort A underwent external ear reconstruction with a classic Antia-Buch flap, as described by Antia and Buch in 1967: The defect was closed by mobilizing an advancement flap from the root of the helix (upper ear), which was closed in a V-Y fashion, after a rim of healthy scaphal cartilage was resected to allow approximation of the skin. The patients in Cohort B underwent external ear reconstruction with a modified Antia-Buch flap, as presented by Franssen and Frechner in 2010. Here, a wedge of skin was removed from the ear lobe (lower ear), to allow mobilization of an advancement flap from the caudal end of the ear, to close the defect. RESULTS: Both techniques allowed tension-free closure. Cohort B, however, required less dissection of the ear. The entire cephalic ear remained unaffected and no scaphal cartilage was sacrificed, thus preserving ear width, with scars that were overall less visible. Also, the loss in ear height associated with Cohort B was easily symmetrized by contralateral ear lobe reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Cohort B achieved closure with less ear dissection, achieving excellent morphological outcomes. The patients in Cohort B had superior levels of satisfaction with scars and ear symmetry than those in Cohort A. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021-03-24 /pmc/articles/PMC7989990/ /pubmed/33777603 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000003498 Text en Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American Society of Plastic Surgeons. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , 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 without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Cosmetic
Abdelkader, Rasha
Malahias, Marco
Abdalbary, Sahar Ahmed
Noaman, Ayman
Antia-Buch versus Franssen-Frechner Technique
title Antia-Buch versus Franssen-Frechner Technique
title_full Antia-Buch versus Franssen-Frechner Technique
title_fullStr Antia-Buch versus Franssen-Frechner Technique
title_full_unstemmed Antia-Buch versus Franssen-Frechner Technique
title_short Antia-Buch versus Franssen-Frechner Technique
title_sort antia-buch versus franssen-frechner technique
topic Cosmetic
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7989990/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33777603
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000003498
work_keys_str_mv AT abdelkaderrasha antiabuchversusfranssenfrechnertechnique
AT malahiasmarco antiabuchversusfranssenfrechnertechnique
AT abdalbarysaharahmed antiabuchversusfranssenfrechnertechnique
AT noamanayman antiabuchversusfranssenfrechnertechnique