BACKGROUND: A multitude of reconstructive options exist for patients after Mohs surgery of cutaneous neoplasms of the head and neck. Secondary intention healing is often overlooked and underused but has numerous advantages, including superior esthetic outcomes compared with surgical reconstruction for wounds that exhibit particular characteristics. The ability to predict cosmetic results based on wound characteristics can greatly help in the decision between surgical repair and secondary intention healing. Although other studies have discussed results after secondary intention healing on various areas of the head and neck, here, we specifically focus on cases of the nasal area. METHODS: We conducted a chart review of 37 patients with nasal reconstructions using secondary intention healing by a single surgeon over a 2-year period. Wound outcomes were graded as poor, acceptable, good, or excellent based on definitions found in the literature. RESULTS: We found that overall, the best cosmetic outcomes were associated with concave areas of the nose, such as the nasal ala and sidewall, and that superficial wounds healed better than deep wounds. Furthermore, we found that convex areas of the nose, such as the nasal tip, did not heal as well by secondary intention. However, if the wound was small and superficial enough, the wound still healed with a good to excellent cosmetic outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Healing by secondary intention is a reasonable consideration for suitable wounds. The need for surgical scar revision is addressed, if necessary, after the wound has healed. The benefits of secondary intention healing include:Future studies will address a larger cohort size of patients with more varied skin types and ages, as these are characteristics that can influence cosmetic outcome. Furthermore, healed wounds continue to improve in appearance over time, and it would be worthwhile to monitor patients' cosmetic outcomes over a longer follow-up period.
BACKGROUND: A multitude of reconstructive options exist for patients after Mohs surgery of cutaneous neoplasms of the head and neck. Secondary intention healing is often overlooked and underused but has numerous advantages, including superior esthetic outcomes compared with surgical reconstruction for wounds that exhibit particular characteristics. The ability to predict cosmetic results based on wound characteristics can greatly help in the decision between surgical repair and secondary intention healing. Although other studies have discussed results after secondary intention healing on various areas of the head and neck, here, we specifically focus on cases of the nasal area. METHODS: We conducted a chart review of 37 patients with nasal reconstructions using secondary intention healing by a single surgeon over a 2-year period. Wound outcomes were graded as poor, acceptable, good, or excellent based on definitions found in the literature. RESULTS: We found that overall, the best cosmetic outcomes were associated with concave areas of the nose, such as the nasal ala and sidewall, and that superficial wounds healed better than deep wounds. Furthermore, we found that convex areas of the nose, such as the nasal tip, did not heal as well by secondary intention. However, if the wound was small and superficial enough, the wound still healed with a good to excellent cosmetic outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Healing by secondary intention is a reasonable consideration for suitable wounds. The need for surgical scar revision is addressed, if necessary, after the wound has healed. The benefits of secondary intention healing include:Future studies will address a larger cohort size of patients with more varied skin types and ages, as these are characteristics that can influence cosmetic outcome. Furthermore, healed wounds continue to improve in appearance over time, and it would be worthwhile to monitor patients' cosmetic outcomes over a longer follow-up period.
Authors: David Nam-Woo Kim; Nour Kibbi; Sean R Christensen; David J Leffell; Kathleen C Suozzi Journal: Arch Dermatol Res Date: 2022-02-02 Impact factor: 3.017