Faculty Opinions recommendation of Facial reanimation with gracilis muscle transfer neurotized to cross-facial nerve graft versus masseteric nerve: a comparative study using the FACIAL CLIMA evaluating system.

Author(s):  
Kofi Boahene
2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. E230-E235
Author(s):  
Nobutaka Yoshioka

Abstract BACKGROUND Hypoglossal-facial direct side-to-end neurorrhaphy has become widely used for facial reanimation in patients with irreversible facial nerve damage. Although this procedure achieves good restoration of facial function, it has disadvantages such as mass movement and lack of spontaneity. OBJECTIVE To present a new facial reanimation technique using hypoglossal-facial direct side-to-end neurorrhaphy with concomitant masseteric-zygomatic nerve branch coaptation and secondary muscle transfer to reduce mass movement and achieve a spontaneous smile in patients with facial paralysis. METHODS This article describes a novel facial reanimation technique that employs hypoglossal and masseteric nerve transfer combined with secondary vascularized functional gracilis muscle transfer. RESULTS Details of the technique are reported in a patient with complete facial paralysis after brain surgery. The hypoglossal nerve was partially served and connected to the mastoid segment of the facial nerve by side-to-end anastomosis to restore facial symmetry. A nerve supplying the masseter muscle was coapted with a zygomatic branch by end-to-end anastomosis to restore voluntary movement of the oral commissure, as well as to assist with eye closure. A cross face sural nerve graft was connected to zygomatic branches on the healthy side. In the second stage, a vascularized functional gracilis muscle graft was transplanted using the cross face nerve graft as the donor nerve to restore a natural smile. CONCLUSION Hypoglossal-facial neurorrhaphy with concomitant masseteric-zygomatic nerve branch coaptation and muscle transfer is an alternative facial reanimation technique that reduces mass movement and achieves a natural smile.


2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 359-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steffen U. Eisenhardt ◽  
Nils A. Eisenhardt ◽  
Jan R. Thiele ◽  
G. Björn Stark ◽  
Holger Bannasch

Head & Neck ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 235-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernardo Bianchi ◽  
Andrea Ferri ◽  
Silvano Ferrari ◽  
Chiara Copelli ◽  
Alice Magri ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-52
Author(s):  
Muhammad Izzuddin Hamzan ◽  
Mior Faiq Abu Tahrin ◽  
Wan Azman Wan Sulaiman

The purpose of this research to address objective excursion and symmetry results from a series of free gracilis muscle transfer (FGMT) cases and examine the predictive intraoperative number of vectors anchored during flap inset on outcomes. A retrospective analysis performs by data retrieved from the HUSM Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery OR Registry from January 2005 to June 2019. All patients who reported facial nerve palsy were recorded and re-evaluated. All characteristics in interest were epidemiologically tabulated and analyzed in detail. Subsequently, outcome assessment was performed to look for facial symmetry and smile excursion compared to the healthy side of the face—this study exempted by the Institutional Review Board of the Hospital of University of Sciences Malaysia. Out of 12 patients diagnosed with facial palsy, four patients underwent static facial reanimation. Eight patients underwent a dynamic facial reanimation, with 4 of them completed two stages of cross-facial nerve grafting (CFNG) and free gracilis muscle transfer (FGMT). One of the FGMTs patients had missed a follow-up. The mean age was 20 (range 11 to 30), one patient was male, and two were female. The mean duration for follow-up was 69 months. The mean duration of operating time was 8.67 hours. All operations without complication, and there was no microvascular re-exploration. Smile excursion and angle excursion at smile improved following FGMT. Association between the number of vectors anchored during flap inset to the outcome were identified. Dynamic facial reanimation using FGMT still the gold standard of treatment, which provides an excellent quantifiable improvement in oral commissure excursion and facial symmetry with smiling. The use of multivector gracilis flap was suggestive to associate with the good outcome on excursion and symmetrical of the smile.


2011 ◽  
Vol 70 (suppl_2) ◽  
pp. ons237-ons243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kalpesh T. Vakharia ◽  
Doug Henstrom ◽  
Scott R. Plotkin ◽  
Mack Cheney ◽  
Tessa A. Hadlock

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2) is a tumor suppressor syndrome defined by bilateral vestibular schwannomas. Facial paralysis, from either tumor growth or surgical intervention, is a devastating complication of this disorder and can contribute to disfigurement and corneal keratopathy. Historically, physicians have not attempted to treat facial paralysis in these patients. OBJECTIVE: To review our clinical experience with free gracilis muscle transfer for the purpose of facial reanimation in patients with NF2. METHODS: Five patients with NF2 and complete unilateral facial paralysis were referred to the facial nerve center at our institution. Charts and operative reports were reviewed; treatment details and functional outcomes are reported. RESULTS: Patients were treated between 2006 and 2009. Three patients were men and 2 were women. The age of presentation of debilitating facial paralysis ranged from 12 to 50 years. All patients were treated with a single-stage free gracilis muscle transfer for smile reanimation. Each obturator nerve of the gracilis was coapted to the masseteric branch of the trigeminal nerve. Measurement of oral commissure excursions at rest and with smile preoperatively and postoperatively revealed an improved and nearly symmetric smile in all cases. CONCLUSION: Management of facial paralysis is oftentimes overlooked when defining a care plan for NF2 patients who typically have multiple brain and spine tumors. The paralyzed smile may be treated successfully with single-stage free gracilis muscle transfer in the motivated patient.


2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 122-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tae Suk Oh ◽  
Hyung Bae Kim ◽  
Jong Woo Choi ◽  
Woo Shik Jeong

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document