Gibreel, Waleed

Background Reconstruction of the lower eyelid represents a unique challenge to the reconstructive surgeon. Studies evaluating the utility of the nasolabial V-Y advancement flap in lower eyelid reconstruction are limited and techniques to optimize outcomes following eyelid reconstruction with this technique are not well described. We seek to evaluate our experience and outcomes with lower eyelid reconstruction using the nasolabial perforator-based V-Y advancement flap. Methods After institutional review board approval, medical charts of all patients who underwent lower eyelid reconstruction using the nasolabial perforator-based V-Y advancement flap between February 2013 and October 2017 were reviewed. Data regarding etiology, location of the lesion, lower eyelid defect, methods of reconstruction, postoperative complications, and follow up duration were collected and analyzed. Results Over the study period, 5 patients (3 male) underwent lower eyelid reconstruction after oncologic resection of melanoma (n = 1) and nonmelanoma (n = 4) skin cancer using the nasolabial perforator-based V-Y advancement flap at a mean age of 69 years (range, 56–82 years). Median follow-up duration was 5.9 months (interquartile range, 2.25–25.9). A mean of 5.4 (range, 2–10) perforators were included in the initial flap design. After completion of flap dissection and perforator division, a mean of 4.4 (range, 2–7) perforators were preserved and included in the flap. All flaps demonstrated clinical viability with no cases of partial or total flap loss. One patient developed an asymptomatic ectropion during the follow-up period. Conclusions The nasolabial, perforator-based V-Y advancement flap is a reliable reconstructive method for lower eyelid defects.

Helmet wear offers protection in various ways against craniomaxillofacial and brain trauma. The specific pattern and overall burden of craniofacial trauma among helmeted and unhelmeted patients has not been well defined. This is a retrospective review of trauma patients involved in documented helmet-associated injuries that presented to the Mayo Clinic Emergency Department in Rochester, Minnesota, and completed initial trauma evaluation between 1999 and 2015. A total of 417 patients (50% unhelmeted, 82% male) were identified. The median age at injury was 22.9 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 15.2–44.2]) and median follow-up was 26 months ([IQR: 2.2–64.8]). The majority of injuries involved motorcycle accidents (57.6%), bicycles (30.2%), and other modes of injury (12.7%). The mean Glasgow Coma Score (GSC) at the time of presentation was 14.2 (SD ± 2.4) and mean injury severity score (ISS) was 10.2 (SD ± 7.5). Motorcycle accidents had a higher mean ISS compared with other modes of injury ( p = 0.048). Unhelmeted patients were more likely to sustain scalp lacerations ( p < 0.0001), facial bone fractures ( p = 0.01), scalp hematomas ( p = 0.041), skull fractures ( p = 0.017), and are more likely to require hospital admission ( p = 0.0003). Unhelmeted patients’ hospital length of stay was on average 2 days longer than helmeted patients’ stay ( p = 0.0721). Unhelmeted patients were more likely to require out-of-home placement than helmeted patients. Among trauma patients, helmet use was associated with less scalp lacerations and hematomas, facial bones fractures, skull fractures, and need for hospital admission. Adoption of legislation and regulations mandating protective helmet use in all states are strongly encouraged to minimize the burden of craniofacial injuries among unhelmeted patients.