Interpolated Flaps

Abstract

Nasal reconstruction has been articulated in the literature since 700 B.C. when the earliest iteration of the forehead flap was described in the Indian medical treatise, the Sushruta Samhita. Since then it has evolved into the interpolated flap which has served as a powerful tool for facial reconstruction. The interpolated flap is constructed from nonadjacent donor tissue that has an inherent blood supply. It requires a multistaged approach and is best suited for reconstruction of large or deep defects of the nose. There are three types of interpolated flaps used for nasal reconstruction: the forehead, melolabial, and nasofacial interpolation flaps. The nose is the central feature of the human face and its placement is both aesthetic and functional. Any defects owing to accidental or iatrogenic trauma can cause physiologic and psychological injury to patients. This article aims to review the aforementioned flaps and give indications, contraindications, procedure details, and future directions of these flaps.

The effect of human recombinant epidermal growth factor on neovascularization and pedicle division time in a rat interpolation flap model

“…The optimum time of pedicle division is determined by the surgeon, considering all these factors. Therefore, there is no clear standardization regarding the time of pedicle division [ 6 , 18 , 23 , 24 ]. Most studies in the literature aim to shorten the pedicle division time and/or safely divide the pedicle at the optimal time.Gatti et al emphasized that the evaluation of neovascularization and the timing of tube flap model division can enhance the use of fluorescent material.…”

A strong reconstruction option for tissue loss on hand and wrist due to firearm injury in the Syrian war

“…With the absence of the necessity of the second surgical session, it creates its superiority over the interpolation flap. [ 10 ] Free flap, another strong and wide option for treatment of the PI has been a difficult method to apply because it may cause a loss in a major artery to the hand and the flap viability is low. The postop fracture reduction with PIF seems a more useful method that those because it allows splint applications and is considered to be the best method in typical cases.…”

“…Following their report, PIF has evoked international attention among reconstructive surgeons, especially for hand-related surgeons. With the absence of the necessity of the second surgical session, it creates its superiority over the interpolation flap [10] . Free flap, another strong and wide option for treatment of the PI has been a difficult method to apply because it may cause a loss in a major artery to the hand and the flap viability is low.…”