No abstract

Background Neoumbilicoplasties are indicated in congenital conditions associated with umbilical agenesis, umbilical loss due to inflammatory destruction, excision of skin cancer involving the umbilical stump and in surgical procedures for herniorrhaphy, as well as in the rare condition of umbilical endometriosis. Objective Neoumbilicoplasty is an adjuvant procedure that may be necessary during abdominoplasty with wide myofascial plication, or repair of concomitant hernias of the abdominal wall. The present article justifies sacrificing the umbilicus followed by neoumbilicoplasty in patients with significant wide myofascial plication or concomitant hernias of the abdominal wall. Methods Seventeen patients underwent a combination of abdominoplasty and wide (greater than 10 cm) vertical plication of the myofascial complex and required neoumbilicoplasty. The male to female ratio was 1:16; mean age was 44 years, mean weight 94.1 kg and mean height 160.2 cm. Characteristic body morphology included gross trunk obesity with a prominent anterior abdominal wall. The female patients were multiparous. Sacrificing the umbilici followed by neoumbilicoplasty was required in patients with umbilical hernias and patients who had divarication of the rectus abdominis muscles with short umbilical stumps. Results Nine patients had concomitant ventral hernias (52.94%) and eight patients had divarication of the rectus abdominis muscles with short umbilical stumps (47.05%). The mean perioperative myofascial plication distance was 15.41 cm and the gap closure required three to five rows of sutures. Conclusion Neoumbilicoplasty is a useful adjuvant procedure during abdominoplasty with wide myofascial plication or repair of concomitant hernias of the abdominal wall.

Background Reconstruction of acquired auricular defects is a challenging procedure. Since its emergence, the helical advancement technique has proved to be an excellent method of repairing many auricle defects. This technique may occasionally result in an alteration in the dimensions of the neoauricle, with subsequent deformity. However, the advantages of this technique are well known, while the pitfalls are scarce. Objective To critically review the selection criteria of patients with acquired auricular defects to determine which are eligible for helical advancement technique without subsequent deformity. Methods From March 2004 to January 2006, 18 patients with three types of upper one-third auricle defects underwent the helical advancement procedure. All patients were male, with mean age of 33.5 years. The defects ranged from 1.2 cm to 4.3 cm in length. Two helical flaps (one on either side of the injury) were advanced along the helical margin to ensure closure. The vertical and horizontal auricular axes were measured before and after surgery, and the actual reduction in millimetres was calculated. Patients were followed up for three months postoperatively. Assessment of the surgical outcome was performed by surgeon (with patient feedback) in the final patient visit. Results The principle pitfall in the form of small neoauricle with or without cupping was reported in five patients (27.77%). The defects in these cases were >2.8 cm and the mean resultant reduction in vertical axes was >5 mm. Statistical analysis resulted in χ2=4.24 and P=0.04 Conclusion The three varieties of upper one-third auricle defects can best be corrected by the helical advancement technique when the defect is <2.8 cm. Furthermore, perioperative reduction in the vertical axis of the neoauricle >5 mm was an important predictive factor in the development of subsequent deformity.

No abstract

No abstract