The fusion of craniofacial reconstruction and microsurgery: A functional and aesthetic approach

Justin M. Broyles, Nicholas B. Abt, Sachin M. Shridharani, Branko Bojovic, Eduardo D. Rodriguez, Amir Dorafshar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Reconstruction of large, composite defects in the craniofacial region has evolved significantly over the past half century. During this time, there have been significant advances in craniofacial and microsurgical surgery. These contributions have often been in parallel; however, over the past 10 years, these two disciplines have begun to overlap more frequently, and the techniques of one have been used to advance the other. In the current review, the authors aim to describe the available options for free tissue reconstruction in craniofacial surgery. Methods: A review of microsurgical reconstructive options of aesthetic units within the craniofacial region was undertaken with attention directed toward surgeon flap preference. Results: Anatomical areas analyzed included scalp, calvaria, forehead, frontal sinus, nose, maxilla and midface, periorbita, mandible, lip, and tongue. Although certain flaps such as the ulnar forearm flap and lateral circumflex femoral artery-based flaps were used in multiple reconstructive sites, each anatomical location possesses a unique array of flaps to maximize outcomes. Conclusions: Craniofacial surgery, like plastic surgery, has made tremendous advancements in the past 40 years. With innovations in technology, flap design, and training, microsurgery has become safer, faster, and more commonplace than at any time in history. Reconstructive microsurgery allows the surgeon to be creative in this approach, and free tissue transfer has become a mainstay of modern craniofacial reconstruction.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)760-769
Number of pages10
JournalPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Volume134
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Microsurgery
Esthetics
Frontal Sinus
Forehead
Maxilla
Plastic Surgery
Femoral Artery
Lip
Scalp
Mandible
Nose
Tongue
Forearm
Skull
History
Technology
Surgeons

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Broyles, J. M., Abt, N. B., Shridharani, S. M., Bojovic, B., Rodriguez, E. D., & Dorafshar, A. (2014). The fusion of craniofacial reconstruction and microsurgery: A functional and aesthetic approach. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 134(4), 760-769. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000000564

The fusion of craniofacial reconstruction and microsurgery : A functional and aesthetic approach. / Broyles, Justin M.; Abt, Nicholas B.; Shridharani, Sachin M.; Bojovic, Branko; Rodriguez, Eduardo D.; Dorafshar, Amir.

In: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Vol. 134, No. 4, 2014, p. 760-769.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Broyles, JM, Abt, NB, Shridharani, SM, Bojovic, B, Rodriguez, ED & Dorafshar, A 2014, 'The fusion of craniofacial reconstruction and microsurgery: A functional and aesthetic approach', Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, vol. 134, no. 4, pp. 760-769. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000000564
Broyles, Justin M. ; Abt, Nicholas B. ; Shridharani, Sachin M. ; Bojovic, Branko ; Rodriguez, Eduardo D. ; Dorafshar, Amir. / The fusion of craniofacial reconstruction and microsurgery : A functional and aesthetic approach. In: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 2014 ; Vol. 134, No. 4. pp. 760-769.
@article{25fa1c953c914e77a4ea44b3354b9160,
title = "The fusion of craniofacial reconstruction and microsurgery: A functional and aesthetic approach",
abstract = "Background: Reconstruction of large, composite defects in the craniofacial region has evolved significantly over the past half century. During this time, there have been significant advances in craniofacial and microsurgical surgery. These contributions have often been in parallel; however, over the past 10 years, these two disciplines have begun to overlap more frequently, and the techniques of one have been used to advance the other. In the current review, the authors aim to describe the available options for free tissue reconstruction in craniofacial surgery. Methods: A review of microsurgical reconstructive options of aesthetic units within the craniofacial region was undertaken with attention directed toward surgeon flap preference. Results: Anatomical areas analyzed included scalp, calvaria, forehead, frontal sinus, nose, maxilla and midface, periorbita, mandible, lip, and tongue. Although certain flaps such as the ulnar forearm flap and lateral circumflex femoral artery-based flaps were used in multiple reconstructive sites, each anatomical location possesses a unique array of flaps to maximize outcomes. Conclusions: Craniofacial surgery, like plastic surgery, has made tremendous advancements in the past 40 years. With innovations in technology, flap design, and training, microsurgery has become safer, faster, and more commonplace than at any time in history. Reconstructive microsurgery allows the surgeon to be creative in this approach, and free tissue transfer has become a mainstay of modern craniofacial reconstruction.",
author = "Broyles, {Justin M.} and Abt, {Nicholas B.} and Shridharani, {Sachin M.} and Branko Bojovic and Rodriguez, {Eduardo D.} and Amir Dorafshar",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1097/PRS.0000000000000564",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "134",
pages = "760--769",
journal = "Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery",
issn = "0032-1052",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The fusion of craniofacial reconstruction and microsurgery

T2 - A functional and aesthetic approach

AU - Broyles, Justin M.

AU - Abt, Nicholas B.

AU - Shridharani, Sachin M.

AU - Bojovic, Branko

AU - Rodriguez, Eduardo D.

AU - Dorafshar, Amir

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Background: Reconstruction of large, composite defects in the craniofacial region has evolved significantly over the past half century. During this time, there have been significant advances in craniofacial and microsurgical surgery. These contributions have often been in parallel; however, over the past 10 years, these two disciplines have begun to overlap more frequently, and the techniques of one have been used to advance the other. In the current review, the authors aim to describe the available options for free tissue reconstruction in craniofacial surgery. Methods: A review of microsurgical reconstructive options of aesthetic units within the craniofacial region was undertaken with attention directed toward surgeon flap preference. Results: Anatomical areas analyzed included scalp, calvaria, forehead, frontal sinus, nose, maxilla and midface, periorbita, mandible, lip, and tongue. Although certain flaps such as the ulnar forearm flap and lateral circumflex femoral artery-based flaps were used in multiple reconstructive sites, each anatomical location possesses a unique array of flaps to maximize outcomes. Conclusions: Craniofacial surgery, like plastic surgery, has made tremendous advancements in the past 40 years. With innovations in technology, flap design, and training, microsurgery has become safer, faster, and more commonplace than at any time in history. Reconstructive microsurgery allows the surgeon to be creative in this approach, and free tissue transfer has become a mainstay of modern craniofacial reconstruction.

AB - Background: Reconstruction of large, composite defects in the craniofacial region has evolved significantly over the past half century. During this time, there have been significant advances in craniofacial and microsurgical surgery. These contributions have often been in parallel; however, over the past 10 years, these two disciplines have begun to overlap more frequently, and the techniques of one have been used to advance the other. In the current review, the authors aim to describe the available options for free tissue reconstruction in craniofacial surgery. Methods: A review of microsurgical reconstructive options of aesthetic units within the craniofacial region was undertaken with attention directed toward surgeon flap preference. Results: Anatomical areas analyzed included scalp, calvaria, forehead, frontal sinus, nose, maxilla and midface, periorbita, mandible, lip, and tongue. Although certain flaps such as the ulnar forearm flap and lateral circumflex femoral artery-based flaps were used in multiple reconstructive sites, each anatomical location possesses a unique array of flaps to maximize outcomes. Conclusions: Craniofacial surgery, like plastic surgery, has made tremendous advancements in the past 40 years. With innovations in technology, flap design, and training, microsurgery has become safer, faster, and more commonplace than at any time in history. Reconstructive microsurgery allows the surgeon to be creative in this approach, and free tissue transfer has become a mainstay of modern craniofacial reconstruction.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84922391990&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84922391990&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000564

DO - 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000564

M3 - Article

C2 - 25357035

AN - SCOPUS:84922391990

VL - 134

SP - 760

EP - 769

JO - Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

JF - Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

SN - 0032-1052

IS - 4

ER -