Faculty Bibliography

Clinical face transplantation, only 10 years old, has evolved into a safe and preferred reconstructive option for the most severe facial defects, in which traditional reconstructive methods have yielded poor outcomes. The ability to simultaneously restore facial function and aesthetics has shown to improve patient's quality of life. Its applicability to post-oncologic resection, however, remains guarded given the current international experience with respect to long term outcomes. J. Surg. Oncol. (c) 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

BACKGROUND: The application of aesthetic, craniofacial, and microsurgical principles in the execution of face transplantation may improve outcomes. Optimal soft-tissue face transplantation can be achieved by incorporating subunit facial skeletal replacement and subsequent tissue resuspension. The purpose of this study was to establish a reconstructive solution for a full face and scalp burn and to evaluate outcome precision and consistency. METHODS: Seven mock face transplants (14 cadavers) were completed in the span of 1 year. Components of the vascularized composite allograft included the eyelids, nose, lips, facial muscles, oral mucosa, total scalp, and ears; and skeletal subunits of the zygoma, nasal bone, and genial segment. Virtual surgical planning was used for osteotomy selection, and to evaluate postoperative precision of hard- and soft-tissue elements. RESULTS: Each transplant experience decreased each subsequent transplant surgical time. Prefabricated cutting guides facilitated a faster dissection of both donor and recipient tissue, requiring minimal alteration to the allograft for proper fixation of bony segments during inset. Regardless of donor-to-recipient size discrepancy, ample soft tissue was available to achieve tension-free allograft inset. Differences between virtual transplant simulation and posttransplant measurements were minimal or insignificant, supporting replicable and precise outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This facial transplant model was designed to optimize reconstruction of extensive soft-tissue defects of the craniofacial region representative of electrical, thermal, and chemical burns, by incorporating skeletal subunits within the allograft. The implementation of aesthetic, craniofacial, and microsurgical principles and computer-assisted technology improves surgical precision, decreases operative time, and may optimize function.

BACKGROUND: Cadaveric face transplant models are routinely used for technical allograft design, perfusion assessment, and transplant simulation but are associated with substantial limitations. The purpose of this study was to describe the experience of implementing a translational donor research facial procurement and solid organ allograft recovery model. METHODS: Institutional review board approval was obtained, and a 49-year-old, brain-dead donor was identified for facial vascularized composite allograft research procurement. The family generously consented to donation of solid organs and the total face, eyelids, ears, scalp, and skeletal subunit allograft. RESULTS: The successful sequence of computed tomographic scanning, fabrication and postprocessing of patient-specific cutting guides, tracheostomy placement, preoperative fluorescent angiography, silicone mask facial impression, donor facial allograft recovery, postprocurement fluorescent angiography, and successful recovery of kidneys and liver occurred without any donor instability. Preservation of the bilateral external carotid arteries, facial arteries, occipital arteries, and bilateral thyrolinguofacial and internal jugular veins provided reliable and robust perfusion to the entirety of the allograft. Total time of facial procurement was 10 hours 57 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: Essential to clinical face transplant outcomes is the preparedness of the institution, multidisciplinary face transplant team, organ procurement organization, and solid organ transplant colleagues. A translational facial research procurement and solid organ recovery model serves as an educational experience to modify processes and address procedural, anatomical, and logistical concerns for institutions developing a clinical face transplantation program. This methodical approach best simulates the stressors and challenges that can be expected during clinical face transplantation. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, V.

Complex periorbital subunit reconstruction is challenging because the goals of effective reconstruction vary from one individual to another. The purpose of this article is to explore the indications and anatomic feasibility of periorbital transplantation by reviewing our institutional repository of facial injury. METHODS: Institutional review board approval was obtained at the R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center for a retrospective chart review conducted on patients with periorbital defects. Patient history, facial defects, visual acuity, and periorbital function were critically reviewed to identify indications for periorbital or total face (incorporating the periorbital subunit) vascularized composite allotransplantation. Cadaveric allograft harvest was then designed and performed for specific patient defects to determine anatomic feasibility. Disease conditions not captured by our patient population warranting consideration were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 7 facial or periorbital transplant candidates representing 6 different etiologies were selected as suitable indications for periorbital transplantation. Etiologies included trauma, burn, animal attack, and tumor, whereas proposed transplants included isolated periorbital and total face transplants. Allograft recovery was successfully completed in 4 periorbital subunits and 1 full face. Dual vascular supply was achieved in 5 of 6 periorbital subunits (superficial temporal and facial vessels). CONCLUSIONS: Transplantation of isolated periorbital structures or full face transplantation including periorbital structures is technically feasible. The goal of periorbital transplantation is to re-establish protective mechanisms of the eye, to prevent deterioration of visual acuity, and to optimize aesthetic outcomes. Criteria necessary for candidate selection and allograft design are identified by periorbital defect, periorbital function, ophthalmologic evaluation, and defect etiology.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic optic neuropathy is characterized by sudden loss of vision following facial trauma leading to variable visual deficits. The purpose of this study was to evaluate recent institutional trends in the treatment of traumatic optic neuropathy, evaluate the outcomes of different treatment strategies, and identify factors associated with improved vision. METHODS: Institutional review board approval was obtained to retrospectively review patients diagnosed with traumatic optic neuropathy at a high-volume trauma center from 2004 to 2012. Pretreatment and posttreatment visual acuity was compared using quantitative analysis of standard ophthalmologic conversion. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients met inclusion criteria (74.3 percent male patients), with a mean age of 38.0 +/- 17.5 years (range, 8 to 82 years). Management of traumatic optic neuropathy involved intravenous corticosteroids alone in 8.3 percent of patients (n = 9), 56.9 percent (n = 62) underwent observation, 28.4 percent (n = 31) had surgical intervention, and 6.4 percent (n = 7) underwent surgery and corticosteroid administration. Only 19.3 percent of patients returned for follow-up. Vision improved in 47.6 percent of patients, with a mean follow-up of 12.9 weeks. Patients younger than 50 years had a trend toward higher rates of visual improvement, 60 percent versus 16.7 percent (p = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of traumatic optic neuropathy patients are unlikely to return for a follow-up examination. Optic nerve decompression has fallen out of favor in the authors' institution, and observation is the most common management strategy. Outcomes following corticosteroid administration and observation are comparable. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.

A clinical case demonstrating the use of a free fibula osteoseptocutaneous flap for reconstruction of a high-energy ballistic mandible defect is detailed. The surgical videos highlight key nuances and pearls of flap design, harvest, dissection, and execution of microsurgical anastomosis. Attention is also given to preoperative surgical planning and postoperative care. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, V.

Efficacy of prophylactic antibiotics in craniofacial fracture management is controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare evidence-based literature recommendations regarding antibiotic prophylaxis in facial fracture management with expert-based practice. A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify published studies evaluating pre-, peri-, and postoperative efficacy of antibiotics in facial fracture management by facial third. Study level of evidence was assessed according to the American Society of Plastic Surgery criteria, and graded practice recommendations were made based on these assessments. Expert opinions were garnered during the Advanced Orbital Surgery Symposium in the form of surveys evaluating senior surgeon clinical antibiotic prescribing practices by time point and facial third. A total of 44 studies addressing antibiotic prophylaxis and facial fracture management were identified. Overall, studies were of poor quality, precluding formal quantitative analysis. Studies supported the use of perioperative antibiotics in all facial thirds, and preoperative antibiotics in comminuted mandible fractures. Postoperative antibiotics were not supported in any facial third. Survey respondents (n = 17) cumulatively reported their antibiotic prescribing practices over 286 practice years and 24,012 facial fracture cases. Percentages of prescribers administering pre-, intra-, and postoperative antibiotics, respectively, by facial third were as follows: upper face 47.1, 94.1, 70.6; midface 47.1, 100, 70.6%; and mandible 68.8, 94.1, 64.7%. Preoperative but not postoperative antibiotic use is recommended for comminuted mandible fractures. Frequent use of pre- and postoperative antibiotics in upper and midface fractures is not supported by literature recommendations, but with low-level evidence. Higher level studies may better guide clinical antibiotic prescribing practices.