BACKGROUND: Lid-cheek junction defects represent a reconstructive challenge because of the susceptibility of the lower eyelid to ectropion. To minimize the inferior tension placed on the lid margin, classic teaching advocates for the use of cervicofacial rotation-advancement flaps as popularized by Mustardé. Despite this approach, ectropion can still be problematic, and elevation of the cheek poses its own set of potential complications. An inferior-to-superior V-Y advancement flap has also been described, but its use is often limited because of the perceived increased risk of ectropion. This study attempts to define this risk by investigating the incidence of postoperative ectropion between cervicofacial and V-Y flaps for the reconstruction of lid-cheek junction defects. METHODS: All patients who underwent reconstruction of lid-cheek junction defects performed by the senior author (D.L.B.) between January of 2002 and March of 2009 were reviewed retrospectively. Only cervicofacial (n = 11) and V-Y flaps (n = 23) were included in the analysis. Patient demographics, defect size, operative time, hospital stay, and postoperative complications were extracted from the clinical record. RESULTS: Nine patients in the cervicofacial group (82 percent) and three patients in the V-Y group (13 percent) experienced a postoperative complication (p = 0.0002). Three cases of ectropion were observed, including two patients in the cervicofacial group (18 percent) and one in the V-Y group (4 percent, p = 0.24). All cases resolved with conservative management. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in ectropion rate was found between the cervicofacial and V-Y groups. The versatility of the V-Y advancement flap is perhaps underestimated in this clinical context. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.
BACKGROUND:Lid-cheek junction defects represent a reconstructive challenge because of the susceptibility of the lower eyelid to ectropion. To minimize the inferior tension placed on the lid margin, classic teaching advocates for the use of cervicofacial rotation-advancement flaps as popularized by Mustardé. Despite this approach, ectropion can still be problematic, and elevation of the cheek poses its own set of potential complications. An inferior-to-superior V-Y advancement flap has also been described, but its use is often limited because of the perceived increased risk of ectropion. This study attempts to define this risk by investigating the incidence of postoperative ectropion between cervicofacial and V-Y flaps for the reconstruction of lid-cheek junction defects. METHODS: All patients who underwent reconstruction of lid-cheek junction defects performed by the senior author (D.L.B.) between January of 2002 and March of 2009 were reviewed retrospectively. Only cervicofacial (n = 11) and V-Y flaps (n = 23) were included in the analysis. Patient demographics, defect size, operative time, hospital stay, and postoperative complications were extracted from the clinical record. RESULTS: Nine patients in the cervicofacial group (82 percent) and three patients in the V-Y group (13 percent) experienced a postoperative complication (p = 0.0002). Three cases of ectropion were observed, including two patients in the cervicofacial group (18 percent) and one in the V-Y group (4 percent, p = 0.24). All cases resolved with conservative management. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in ectropion rate was found between the cervicofacial and V-Y groups. The versatility of the V-Y advancement flap is perhaps underestimated in this clinical context. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.