Skip to Main Content (Press Enter)

Logo UNISS
  • ×
  • Home
  • Degrees
  • Courses
  • Jobs
  • People
  • Outputs
  • Organizations
  • Third Mission
  • Expertise & Skills

Logo UNISS

|

UNIFIND

uniss.it
  • ×
  • Home
  • Degrees
  • Courses
  • Jobs
  • People
  • Outputs
  • Organizations
  • Third Mission
  • Expertise & Skills
  1. Outputs

Surgical Outcomes and Complications of Distal Nasal Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Academic Article
Publication Date:
2025
Short description:
Surgical Outcomes and Complications of Distal Nasal Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis / Salzano, G., Scocca, V., Romano, A., Vaira, L.A., Lechien, J.R., Maglitto, F., Petrocelli, M., Dell'Aversana Orabona, G.. - In: JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE. - ISSN 2077-0383. - 14:22(2025). [10.3390/jcm14227983]
abstract:
Background: Reconstruction of the distal nose represents a major surgical challenge due to the aesthetic and functional relevance of this subunit. Various techniques—including local, regional and free flaps and grafts—have been described, but high-quality evidence comparing outcomes remains limited. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Embase, and Google Scholar. A single-arm meta-analysis was performed to evaluate complications, revision surgeries, and aesthetic and functional outcomes. Secondary outcomes included flap necrosis, revision procedures, and airway function. Results: Forty articles were included in the qualitative synthesis and 38 in the quantitative analysis, from an initial 587. The analysis involved 1362 patients (mean age 60.6 years) undergoing distal nasal reconstruction, most commonly for malignancy. The pooled complication rate was 11%, and was highest with regional flaps (26%). Flap/graft necrosis occurred in 5% of free flaps and 2% of regional flaps, with none reported for local flaps or grafts. Revision surgery was required in 7% overall, but was greater with mixed flaps (11%), compared to graft (3%), local (1%), and regional (0%) techniques. Dermabrasion and secondary contouring were infrequent. Aesthetic outcomes were inconsistently reported, precluding meta-analysis. Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis provide an overview of reconstructive options and outcomes for distal nasal defects. Local and regional flaps remain the most reliable and versatile solutions for small-to-moderate, partial-thickness defects, offering low complication and revision rates. Free flaps, while essential for extensive or full-thickness reconstructions, are associated with greater morbidity and revision burden. Standardised reporting of outcomes relative to defect size and thickness is required to guide evidence-based decisions.
Iris type:
1.1 Articolo in rivista
Keywords:
aesthetic outcomes; free flaps; functional outcomes; local flaps; nasal reconstruction; skin grafts; surgical morbidity
List of contributors:
Salzano, G.; Scocca, V.; Romano, A.; Vaira, L. A.; Lechien, J. R.; Maglitto, F.; Petrocelli, M.; Dell'Aversana Orabona, G.
Authors of the University:
VAIRA Luigi Angelo
Handle:
https://iris.uniss.it/handle/11388/378378
Published in:
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
Journal
  • Use of cookies

Powered by VIVO | Designed by Cineca | 26.7.2.0