Nour Kibbi1, Yulia Khan2, David J Leffell3, Sean R Christensen3, Kathleen C Suozzi3. 1. Department of Dermatology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA. kibbi@stanford.edu. 2. Advanced Dermatology and Cosmetic Surgery, Phoenix, AZ, USA. 3. Department of Dermatology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Traditionally, second intent healing (SIH) in the periocular region is reserved for small and/or concave defects, particularly those located on the medial canthus. AIM: The purpose of this study was to identify factors impacting outcomes of SIH for periocular tumors following Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS). METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed of all periocular lesions treated with MMS followed by SIH from a single academic surgical center over a 5-year period. Data regarding tumor characteristics and follow-up was recorded. The modified Manchester scale was utilized to evaluate scar outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 39 tumors included, 14 (35.9%) were located on the lower eyelid, 12 (30.8%) on the upper eyelid, 6 (15.4%) on the lateral canthus, and 7 (17.9%) on the medial canthus. Involvement of the eyelid margin was seen in 11 (28.2%) of cases. The average defect diameter and area were 1.3 cm and 1.04 cm-squared. Twenty-three cases (59.0%) healed with optimal results. Larger defects were significantly associated with poorer outcomes of SIH (odds ratio 0.205, p = 0.017 by multivariate analysis). Anatomic location, involvement of the lid margin, age, and follow-up interval were not significant factors; however, medial canthus defects were least likely to heal with optimal results. On average, medial canthal lesions were larger in size (mean diameter 1.76 cm, mean area 1.97 cm-squared). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study suggests that periorbital defects in all locations with area less than 1.04 cm2 heal well by SIH. In this cohort, larger lesions on the medial canthus healed with worse outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Traditionally, second intent healing (SIH) in the periocular region is reserved for small and/or concave defects, particularly those located on the medial canthus. AIM: The purpose of this study was to identify factors impacting outcomes of SIH for periocular tumors following Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS). METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed of all periocular lesions treated with MMS followed by SIH from a single academic surgical center over a 5-year period. Data regarding tumor characteristics and follow-up was recorded. The modified Manchester scale was utilized to evaluate scar outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 39 tumors included, 14 (35.9%) were located on the lower eyelid, 12 (30.8%) on the upper eyelid, 6 (15.4%) on the lateral canthus, and 7 (17.9%) on the medial canthus. Involvement of the eyelid margin was seen in 11 (28.2%) of cases. The average defect diameter and area were 1.3 cm and 1.04 cm-squared. Twenty-three cases (59.0%) healed with optimal results. Larger defects were significantly associated with poorer outcomes of SIH (odds ratio 0.205, p = 0.017 by multivariate analysis). Anatomic location, involvement of the lid margin, age, and follow-up interval were not significant factors; however, medial canthus defects were least likely to heal with optimal results. On average, medial canthal lesions were larger in size (mean diameter 1.76 cm, mean area 1.97 cm-squared). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study suggests that periorbital defects in all locations with area less than 1.04 cm2 heal well by SIH. In this cohort, larger lesions on the medial canthus healed with worse outcomes.
Entities:
Keywords:
Eyelid; Granulation; Mohs surgery; Periorbital skin; Scar; Second intent
Authors: Suzanne M Connolly; Diane R Baker; Brett M Coldiron; Michael J Fazio; Paul A Storrs; Allison T Vidimos; Mark J Zalla; Jerry D Brewer; Wendy Smith Begolka; Timothy G Berger; Michael Bigby; Jean L Bolognia; David G Brodland; Scott Collins; Terrence A Cronin; Mark V Dahl; Jane M Grant-Kels; C William Hanke; George J Hruza; William D James; Clifford Warren Lober; Elizabeth I McBurney; Scott A Norton; Randall K Roenigk; Ronald G Wheeland; Oliver J Wisco Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2012-09-05 Impact factor: 11.527