Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of 2 types of tarsoconjunctival pedicle flaps for reconstruction of large lower eyelid defects.
Methods: The authors performed a retrospective medical record review of consecutive patients who underwent centrally or laterally based tarsoconjunctival pedicle transconjunctival flap for lower eyelid reconstruction for defects greater than 50% of the lid margin. Full-thickness skin grafts were used for anterior lamellar reconstruction in all cases. The primary outcome measure was eyelid position, function, and satisfactory appearance.
Results: A total of 43 patients were identified. Twenty-six patients underwent reconstruction with a centrally based tarsoconjunctival pedicle flap; 17 patients underwent reconstruction with a laterally based tarsoconjunctival pedicle flap. The average size of the lid defect was 77.7% (range, 50% to 100%) in the central group and 75% (range, 50% to 100%) in the lateral group ( P = 0.604). Mean follow-up time was 61.5 weeks in the central group and 46.6 weeks in the lateral group ( P = 0.765). After division of the flap and during follow-up, 27% of the centrally based group required revisional surgery, versus none in the laterally based group ( P = 0.03). All the patients with centrally based flaps required second-stage flap division, whereas only 52% of patients with a laterally based flap underwent second-stage flap division ( P < 0.001).
Conclusion: For reconstruction of large lower lid defects requiring lid-sharing procedures, centrally and laterally based procedures had equivalent functional outcome, but the laterally based group had less need for revisional procedures and may not need a second-stage division of the flap.
Clinical Question/level Of Evidence: Therapeutic, III.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000011522 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!